What do you hope for when you die?

QB, I agree that the story contains many unfounded claims, exaggerations and untruths. If I remember correctly, there is not a historical record of Jesus even being alive. I would think that, if Jesus was a one-and-only type of deity, he would have at least left behind a strong historical record and evidence.

And I'm sticking to my claim of Jesus' lack of immutability. He was human, after all.
 
Nick the Pilot said:
QB, I agree that the story contains many unfounded claims, exaggerations and untruths. If I remember correctly, there is not a historical record of Jesus even being alive. I would think that, if Jesus was a one-and-only type of deity, he would have at least left behind a strong historical record and evidence.

And I'm sticking to my claim of Jesus' lack of immutability. He was human, after all.
Click to expand...


I suspect if Paul hadn't been such a prolific writer we may never have heard of Jesus.
 
Tadashi said:
How does the Bible having discrepancies and errors lead to the implausibility of God? Doesn't it only mean the people who wrote and assembled the Bible didn't get it all correct? (which is not surprising to me since they were humans, thus fallible as we all are.)

I first became a Deist, which requires no scriptures nor religions to follow, to believe in the existence of a spiritual governing power of the universe. And then read the Bible, not thinking even for a second that it's the inerrant word of God. But what Jesus taught spoke directly to my heart and made me think, he is super-extraordinary, one of those who understands God so darn well, and I decided that I want to follow him. (Now I'm even willing to believe in the certain aspect of his divinity and supernatural ability.)

But that's just me... thought I'd throw my 2 cents in. I have nothing against agnosticism. Most of my Japanese family and friends are agnostic and I love them just the same. :)

Tad
Click to expand...

It is a possibility a deity could exist somewhere but I don't think the one featured in the Bible is the least bit credible, as well as being very nasty indeed!
 
According to Genesis, God condemns and vilifies all women, and places a curse on all women. That's more than just "discrepancies and errors," it is an intentional rewriting and falsifying of the original story, and it is hate-mongering, pure and simple.
 
Nick the Pilot said:
According to Genesis, God condemns and vilifies all women, and places a curse on all women. That's more than just "discrepancies and errors," it is an intentional rewriting and falsifying of the original story, and it is hate-mongering, pure and simple.
Click to expand...

In which case the entity needs hanging out to dry by its dangly bits!:D
 
QB, The funny thing is, I believe the original version of Genesis was (and still is) correct. But it has been intentionally changed and re-written so many times over thousands and thousands of years, it is now incorrect. We don't need to 'string up' the deity, we need to string up the people who altered the original writings.
 
Nick the Pilot said:
QB, The funny thing is, I believe the original version of Genesis was (and still is) correct. But it has been intentionally changed and re-written so many times over thousands and thousands of years, it is now incorrect. We don't need to 'string up' the deity, we need to string up the people who altered the original writings.
Click to expand...


And what did the 'original' Genesis have to say?
 
Quirkybird said:
It is a possibility a deity could exist somewhere but I don't think the one featured in the Bible is the least bit credible, as well as being very nasty indeed!
Click to expand...

I know what you mean. I don't believe in the god of the OT who wills genocides. My faith in God won't be affected by some ancient people's bad interpretation of Him. I don't picture God in a negative way just because people have sometimes misunderstood Him. That has nothing to do with the God I believe in.

Tad
 
Nick the Pilot said:
According to Genesis, God condemns and vilifies all women, and places a curse on all women. That's more than just "discrepancies and errors," it is an intentional rewriting and falsifying of the original story, and it is hate-mongering, pure and simple.
Click to expand...

I was mainly referring to the NT, because that's where my God and my hero (Jesus) are. I hope this doesn't offend people of Jewish faith (I have great respect for Judaism for realizing the concept of monotheism), but I consider Genesis totally allegorical (though I must admit its insinuation of the big bang is quite amazing), so I don't take much of anything in there seriously.

Tad
 
Nick the Pilot said:
If I remember correctly, there is not a historical record of Jesus even being alive.
Click to expand...

Most contemporary scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, and most biblical scholars and classical historians see the theories of his non-existence as effectively refuted. In antiquity, the existence of Jesus was never denied by those who opposed Christianity. As for the divinity of Jesus, I'm on the fence.

Tad
 
Actually Jesus's existence is highly questioned...we only have ONE book that discusses him clearly, the bible. References from Josephus have been refuted. (and they were only references, they never named him).

And the books we have are dated, not eye witness accounts but third hand accounts many decades after his life/death. While we have amazing Roman and Jewish records, we have no account of this famous trial...and conviction, and execution. Even with what we have it is only snippets of his life. 90% of it missing. And lastly the person that wrote the most about him....never met him, he had a vision.

But...again, that does not make the stories, parables, metaphors any less...
 
wil said:
Actually Jesus's existence is highly questioned...we only have ONE book that discusses him clearly, the bible. References from Josephus have been refuted. (and they were only references, they never named him).

And the books we have are dated, not eye witness accounts but third hand accounts many decades after his life/death. While we have amazing Roman and Jewish records, we have no account of this famous trial...and conviction, and execution. Even with what we have it is only snippets of his life. 90% of it missing. And lastly the person that wrote the most about him....never met him, he had a vision.

But...again, that does not make the stories, parables, metaphors any less...
Click to expand...

I was purely talking about his existence... I am fully aware that there is a significant debate about his nature, his actions and his sayings.

I'm with Bart Ehrman on "the existence of Jesus."

This is the synopsis of Ehrman's book:

In Did Jesus Exist? historian and Bible expert Bart Ehrman confronts the question, "Did Jesus exist at all?" Ehrman vigorously defends the historical Jesus, identifies the most historically reliable sources for best understanding Jesus’ mission and message, and offers a compelling portrait of the person at the heart of the Christian tradition.

Known as a master explainer with deep knowledge of the field, Bart Ehrman methodically demolishes both the scholarly and popular “mythicist” arguments against the existence of Jesus. Marshaling evidence from within the Bible and the wider historical record of the ancient world, Ehrman tackles the key issues that surround the mythologies associated with Jesus and the early Christian movement.


Tad
 
QB, you asked,
　
"And what did the 'original' Genesis have to say?"
　
--> I belong to a philosophical and religious group of people called Theosophists. According to Theosophy:
　
The original version of Genesis was written millions of years ago, in an now-unknown language, by the actual ‘gods’ who created the earth and humanity. (Yes, gods, plural not singular, just like Genesis 1.26 says.) Genesis was not given to the Hebrews directly, but was passed down to them from earlier societies.
　
Genesis was originally written in a now-unknown language. It has been translated into many languages over the last couple of millions of years. The present English version is quite different than the original version.
　
According to Theosophy, we now have a version that was translated directly from the original language into English. This direct-translation version is called the Stanzas of Dzyan:
　
First half:

http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/sd/sd1-1-01.htm

Second half:

http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/sd/sd2-1-01.htm
 
Nick the Pilot said:
QB, you asked,
　
"And what did the 'original' Genesis have to say?"
　
--> I belong to a philosophical and religious group of people called Theosophists. According to Theosophy:
　
The original version of Genesis was written millions of years ago, in an now-unknown language, by the actual ‘gods’ who created the earth and humanity. (Yes, gods, plural not singular, just like Genesis 1.26 says.) Genesis was not given to the Hebrews directly, but was passed down to them from earlier societies.
　
Genesis was originally written in a now-unknown language. It has been translated into many languages over the last couple of millions of years. The present English version is quite different than the original version.
　
According to Theosophy, we now have a version that was translated directly from the original language into English. This direct-translation version is called the Stanzas of Dzyan:
　
First half:

http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/sd/sd1-1-01.htm

Second half:

The Secret Doctrine by H. P. Blavatsky, Vol 2, Stanzas of Dzyan
Click to expand...
Wow! Thanks for posting that, I'd not seen this before.
 
How did an unknown document written in an unknown language get found and translated?

Is this channeled information, or is it similar to the Joseph Smith story?
 
Wil asked,
　
"How did an unknown document written in an unknown language get found and translated?"

--> It has existed all this time on a ‘high level of the astral plane’ and was never 'lost.' It does not exist as a physical document (as far as I know). It was written by, or for the benefit of, the seven ‘gods’ mentioned in Genesis 1.26. They have always had this document and it was decided that humanity was finally ready to read a direct translation of the original document.
　
"Is this channeled information, or is it similar to the Joseph Smith story?"
　
--> It is channeled information. Great men such as Buddha belong to a group of leaders of the human race who provide us with guidance, and they intermittently incarnate and start world religions. Two members of this group had one of their students, Madame Blavatsky, be a ‘channel’ to read the document and translate it directly into English. (The word 'channeling' is misleading, because it often means the channel loses consciousness while they channel. Madame Blavatsky was always fully conscious as she read the document and translated it into English.)

She did not work alone, but was under the constant direction of these two leaders as she translated the original document directly into English. The translation work turned out to be very difficult, because so many occult concepts did not have English equivalents. For example, the Virgin Mary of Christianity (who is the same as Guan Yin in Buddhism) is actually a symbolism of an occult principle called Mulaprakriti. Translating and finding corresponding terms in English for concepts such as Mulaprakriti turned out to be very difficult.
　
I’m not sure how Joseph Smith worked. Wasn’t his story revealed to him by an angel?

 
Just as the Biblical authors did, people create the deity in the image they desire, which is fine, as long as their deity doesn't cause them use their faith in an abusive way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top