Post: #276

What do you think about Kenneth Humphries and his site Jesus Never Existed? I know some people think his ideas are laughable. I want to know why.

Post: #277

(03-04-2016 03:14 PM)Pride male Wrote:  What do you think about Kenneth Humphries and his site Jesus Never Existed? I know some people think his ideas are laughable. I want to know why.

I assume this is aimed towards me, seeing as how I've called his ideas idiotic in the past.

First, Humphries has to come up with ridiculous scenarios to get rid of information he doesn't like. He posits that James, whom Paul identifies as "the brother of the Lord," is not actually Jesus' biological brother. The issue is that while Paul will refer to other Christians as "brethren IN the Lord," he does not refer to them as "brothers OF the Lord." He posits that the "who was called Christ" is an interpolation into the passage about James in Josephus, when the fact is that his alternative theory, Jesus ben Dananeus, doesn't work. Josephus would not simply have called him "Jesus," but would've identified exactly whom he was talking about. Humphries also has to completely throw out the Josephan Testimonium Flavium, which, while partially interpolated, was not entirely so. We know this because we have an uninterpolated section in the Arabic edition, plus early church fathers make indirect reference to it.

Second, he has to draw upon spurious at best connections, ones that even the most radical scholars have now abandoned. In doing so, he has to rely on scholarship that is at least 70+ years out of date and even longer in some cases. In making reference to Jesus as some syncretic figure, he shows complete incompetence in Christian origins but also in his understanding of Second Temple Judaic belief, which is where a historical Jesus figure must be understood from (see E.P. Sanders' Jesus and Judaism).

Third, he has to resort to conspiracy theories to explain why every competent scholar of Christian origins in the Western world believes that a historical Jesus of Nazareth existed. That's not just Christian believers, it's atheists and agnostics like Bart Ehrman, Gerd Ludemann, and Robert Funk. There was a peer-reviewed mythicist book not too long ago as well, but it has been completely ignored. For scholars, the question "did Jesus exist?" was settled over a century ago.

Fourth, he has to date the gospels ridiculously late. He dates Mark to 135, 65-70 years after every competent scholar. The issue is that Mark is quoted from in AD 95-96, in the 1st Epistle of Clement.

There's also the issue that a lot of his sources are absolute shit, but I don't have time to deal with everything he gets wrong.

Post: #278

Believing in any higher power indicates the refusal of taking 100% responsibility for were we are in our lives and what happens to us. That is my personal opinion.

Post: #279

(03-05-2016 02:24 AM)SudoRoot Wrote:  Believing in any higher power indicates the refusal of taking 100% responsibility for were we are in our lives and what happens to us. That is my personal opinion.

I think the word you're looking for here is "Providence", not belief.

There are no serious Christian sects I can think of that accept the idea that you're not responsible for your own wrongdoings. If you think Christianity promotes the phrase "The Devil made me do it," you have mistaken a religious teaching for the rationalisation made popular by a 1950s black comedian named Flip Wilson, who made the phrase a household term.

The phrase was one that Wilson attributed to one of his characters, a woman character famously named Geraldine Jones. He conceived the character as a feminist.

Christianity at least entirely enshrines the concept of free will: it is up to us as humans to choose good or choose evil. And it fully accepts the idea we will often choose evil and try to rationalise it down to some other source - that was indeed what Eve is said to have done in the Garden of Eden, with her response to God about eating from the Tree of Life being "The serpent deceived me, and I ate." If anything it is an atheist point of view that human beings can pawn off their shitty behaviour to their genes, their upbringing, their skin colour, or the chemicals in their brain.

Religion does not encourage you to leave it all to God and let him sort it all out. If anything it compels action. Ben Franklin might not have been a theologian, but he had a point when he said "God helps those who help themselves."

God save us from people who mean well. -storm

Post: #280

@Truth Teller. So you believe in the literal interpretation of the Bible? So Jesus was really born of a virgin and resurrected from the dead?

Post: #281

(03-05-2016 08:50 AM)Pride male Wrote:  @Truth Teller. So you believe in the literal interpretation of the Bible? So Jesus was really born of a virgin and resurrected from the dead?

If you mean literal as in the sense that the author intended to convey, yes. If you mean literal in the very wooden way of "everything happened," then no. The creation myth in Genesis 1-3 is not designed to show how everything was made, but why. I'm also not arguing for the Christ of faith. I'm simply talking about the historical Jesus. The historical Jesus is a different figure than the Christ of faith.

It's very tough to nail down a precise origin of the infancy narratives. Raymond Brown's The Birth of the Messiah is an outstanding examination of them. The pagan parallels largely don't work or don't exist. For example, Mithras is a commonly cited parallel, but Mithras wasn't born of a virgin. Mithras was told to have sprang from a rock. There's also the issue that Mithraism is a later development than Christianity, but who cares about that fact?

Post: #282

I call myself an atheist whenever the subject of religious beliefs comes up because of a social connotation that it carries - if you have some story to sell me about who god is, what his morals are, what rewards and punishments he metes out to humans based on how they conduct themselves on earth, I'm not buying it.

I don't believe any story about a god who directly interferes in the day to day happenings of earth to help the downtrodden faithful or punish the sinful, because we never see anything like that. I also don't believe anyone else believes such a story. Every "christian" I've seen, in real life and on the internet, has some major problem with the way his or her immediate peers live their lives. They're pushing christianity to try to scare their peers into some sort of lifestyle change.

The true answer to the question "where does the universe come from" is way over my head.

Post: #283

Maybe god and the devil are aspects of our inner selves.

Post: #284

(03-13-2016 06:34 AM)Walker Wrote:  I call myself an atheist whenever the subject of religious beliefs comes up because of a social connotation that it carries - if you have some story to sell me about who god is, what his morals are, what rewards and punishments he metes out to humans based on how they conduct themselves on earth, I'm not buying it.

That's it's whole purpose though. Religion is a social system used to accelerate the impartation of morals, previous generations to the next.

Like I say, the origin of biology is not a religious question. The origin of religion is a biological question.

Post: #285

Funny.

Post: #286

@Truth Teller and any other Catholic posters,

What are your thoughts on groups like FSSP?

Post: #287

I believe in God as described in the Bible. I feel that He plays a very limited role in day to day life however.

Post: #288

(03-14-2016 06:06 AM)iop890 Wrote:  @Truth Teller and any other Catholic posters,

What are your thoughts on groups like FSSP?

I like it a lot. I think there's great value in having traditional Catholic options that are sanctioned by the Church. I also have a lot of problems with many of the things done "in the spirit" of Vatican II, as far too many theologically questionable practices are condoned "in Vatican II's spirit."

Most importantly, though, it's good that masculine Catholic men have somewhere to gather. The church is only now realizing the crisis of masculinity it's having, hopefully not too late.

Post: #289

To all the athiests that say "I wish I believed in God, things would be much easier." I completely disagree.

Since I started believing in God, keeping myself honest and holding myself to an unchanging moral standard has been much harder than anything I ever held myself to as an atheist. When you don't believe in God, you make yourself your own judge. Yes, maybe the lack of faith gives more uncertainty on the future, but exonerating yourself of and rationalizing away every bad deed you commit is far more intoxicating. For decades I would tell myself that yea, I'm imperfect, but I'm a good person. According to whom? If I'm the final answer on that, I'm always going to rule in my favor. The impulse only grows with age.

Holding myself to an unchanging moral standard every day has been one of the most difficult things I've ever sought. Every night I go to sleep and think about what I've done, and what I could do better: "Lord forgive me, ..." Every morning I awake with a new chance to set things right. I am given that gift every morning. I am human, I am imperfect. Each day I try to better myself; it is something beautiful. If I was born perfect, I would never have the appreciation of imperfection or feel the achievement of striving towards being a better person. Repenting for my sins gives me an awareness of myself I never had before. I can no longer turn my back on or rationalize away what is in my own power to change. Anyone who says that makes things easier has much more to learn.

Post: #290

I was brought up in a catholic church and I remembered when I was 7,I had become skeptical of god's existence, even though it didn't last too long. When I was 16, 17, I completely stopped believing in god.

I actually find it foolish to believe that there is a superior force out there controlling us, I also felt a small increase in my personal happiness since I stopped believing in god.

Post: #291

(03-20-2016 03:07 PM)thoughtgypsy Wrote:  To all the athiests that say "I wish I believed in God, things would be much easier." I completely disagree.

Since I started believing in God, keeping myself honest and holding myself to an unchanging moral standard has been much harder than anything I ever held myself to as an atheist. When you don't believe in God, you make yourself your own judge. Yes, maybe the lack of faith gives more uncertainty on the future, but exonerating yourself of and rationalizing away every bad deed you commit is far more intoxicating. For decades I would tell myself that yea, I'm imperfect, but I'm a good person. According to whom? If I'm the final answer on that, I'm always going to rule in my favor. The impulse only grows with age.

^^^
I wholeheartedly agree. I have been battling serious depression over this. It's like God is wrestling with evil in my head.

For example Ill be driving on the highway and thoughts like ramming my vehicle into an adjacent semi truck goes through my head. WTF? Why would I be thinking this - I don't want to wish harm on anybody. Drives me crazy.

Also - I've been shunned and ostracized for my views on many occasion's. Even by my very own family. I don't even speak on it outside of this forum anymore. It gets much harder for you in this world when you believe in God.

Post: #292

I was raised Christian (technically Catholic) but during my teen years/early 20s I was proud to be atheist/agnostic. One of those smug shits pretty much.

As I've grown older and a bit wiser, I embrace religion a bit more now. Not as a means of providence but more so as a means of introspection and understanding.

The bible I read is a little different from most here though.

Post: #293

God is not the ultimate idea nor should be the focal point of any religion. God is not above everything.

Post: #294

When we look at for instance the Ancient Greeks who believed in many gods, is it not apparant that our own idea of monotheism (where we frame the question as Do you believe in God as opposed to Gods) might be a cultural or historic construct?

Why not ask do you believe in the gods (plural)? I know the answer to this question but wonder what others think.

Post: #295

Well, not in the sense of God being in control of my life.

I'm in control of (and reponsible for) my actions/choices.
God (or "a higher cosmic power") just presents opportunites to me, so I have to pick the right one and live with the consequences.

Post: #296

I believe in God as much as I believe in Santa Clause.

Post: #297

thoughtgypsey: Can you explain why you need to believe in God in order to hold yourself up to those standards?

Post: #298

(03-24-2016 08:25 AM)Atheistani Wrote:  Why not ask do you believe in the gods (plural)? I know the answer to this question but wonder what others think.

Because the Greco-Roman gods are crude, anthropomorphic figures who clearly exist inside space/time. They're little more than supermen.

Also, Aquinas' First Way conclusively indicates that you can have only one prime mover.

Post: #299

^ Respectfully how exactly is God better than that?

Post: #300

The point is that God is not above everything. Imagine if God decided on Judgement Day that he didnt like the colour blue, and decided to punish all those who whose favourite colour was blue with a thohsand years in the hellfire. Or if he simply went back on his words in the bible cos he changed his mind. Is he bound by his word?

Would you still respect and worship such a god? If not then you agree there is a morality above God that he is bound by. Would you worship said god no matter what he did?

You might say he will never do anything 'bad' or 'wrong' but then that will limit gods power and he is not allpowerful but bound by the same greater sense of right and wrong as us.