Irreverent Bible Study

[Rafterman]

Really enjoyed the most recent Ra-Men Podcast hosted by Aron Ra.

This week's guest is David Fitzgerald author of Nailed: Ten Christian Myths that show Jesus Never Existed at All, discussing the origins of the Genesis stories in the Old Testament and the Jesus narratives in the Gospels. It's a very lively and educational discussion around the multiple creation myths in the first few chapters of the bible, as well as the multiple accounts of Jesus' birth, life, and death and how they draw on the much older and more well known oral traditions of the day.

As someone who grew up in the church, rarely missed a sunday service, sunday school class, bible study, revival, or special program, I honestly did not know that there are multiple and conflicting versions of these stories in the bible. Guess Brother Johnson never wanted us to talk about that much.

http://www.thera-men.com/

https://www.spreaker.com/user/theramen/ra-men-special-irreverent-bible-study

Regardless of your views on faith, give it a listen. You might learn something that causes you to dig further or you may just reinforce your faith in the all mighty.

Enjoy.

[SHaYap]

I still believe most of the material were 'constructed' during the times when 'breaking off the yoke' of mighty Rome was the principal motivation for the diaspora Jews with the 'stories' being made according to prophecies ~ the pesher methods ensured that the 'message' could be coded and disseminated throughout the empire and still be kept secret from the ruling Roman Senate ~ but I think the Romans knew about it too ~ guessing that is why the Oppression of 'Christians' of the day was expressed with such vehement intent ~

~

[SpiritWriter]

Really enjoyed the most recent Ra-Men Podcast hosted by Aron Ra.

This week's guest is David Fitzgerald author of Nailed: Ten Christian Myths that show Jesus Never Existed at All, discussing the origins of the Genesis stories in the Old Testament and the Jesus narratives in the Gospels. It's a very lively and educational discussion around the multiple creation myths in the first few chapters of the bible, as well as the multiple accounts of Jesus' birth, life, and death and how they draw on the much older and more well known oral traditions of the day.

As someone who grew up in the church, rarely missed a sunday service, sunday school class, bible study, revival, or special program, I honestly did not know that there are multiple and conflicting versions of these stories in the bible. Guess Brother Johnson never wanted us to talk about that much.

http://www.thera-men.com/

https://www.spreaker.com/user/theramen/ra-men-special-irreverent-bible-study

Regardless of your views on faith, give it a listen. You might learn something that causes you to dig further or you may just reinforce your faith in the all mighty.

Enjoy.

Very cool wouldn't you say? I say this... just because there are various creation myths, that does not mean Jesus (even as a different name) never existed, or came from a virgin, or was born on a special holy night or any other fact at all regarding the bible. God works in mysterious ways and I think it's awesome.

I'm glad you are studying this information it keeps getting better. Study to show thyself approved! :-)

Edited November 3, 2014 by SpiritWriter

[Davros of Skaro]

Awesome!

Some people cannot see fiction for what it is. :/

[dr no]

Excellent podcast,its amazing how unoriginal and derivative the bible is,the early christians should've been sued for plagiarism!

[+Link of Hyrule]

I just finished listening to the podcast. Some interesting material. I know that this needs to be "entertaining" or else no one would listen, and I know that most of the listeners would be sceptics too, but I think they occasionally (not always, but occasionally) cross the line into ridicule of beliefs (one example that stuck out was "the Lord works in delirious ways" - it's not necessary to say this unless you're trying to ridicule those who believe it). And this is probably a result of where they hail from (well, the dude from Texas at least) but their references to Christians tended to revolved primarily around the uber-fundamentalist Christians ("if it ain't from Jesus, it's from the Devil" being one among many such comments).

That said, as I listened to the comments I was continually reminded of a Proverb in the Bible - The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him ~ Proverbs 18:17. Remember that everything they say is not necessarily irrefutable (the most obvious is their choice to rely on a 10th Century AD text to refer to the serpent in the Garden of Eden, surely they need something less removed from the events to base their comments on, but instead of being told this all we are told is that it is a reference to "Talmudic tradition") and since all of those in the podcast were non-believers, naturally there's no one to state the case for the opposition. There's far too much in the recording for me to personally do so I'll just leave it be.

As I said, there's some good information in there as well. Thanks for sharing

~ Regards, PA

Edited November 5, 2014 by Paranoid Android

[+Liquid Gardens]

(one example that stuck out was "the Lord works in delirious ways" - it's not necessary to say this unless you're trying to ridicule those who believe it).

As opposed to the Bible referring to non-believers as fools and swine? That is instead a thoughtful, intellectual, 'necessary' analysis of non-believers?

[Grandpa Greenman]

And saying nonbelievers are amoral because they don't base their morality on the Bible is not ridicule?

[GoldenWolf]

"the Lord works in delirious ways"

Who said that? I want to like their post.

[+Link of Hyrule]

As opposed to the Bible referring to non-believers as fools and swine? That is instead a thoughtful, intellectual, 'necessary' analysis of non-believers?

Fair point. That wasn't the only time in the podcast that someone said something though. And I suppose there's also the derisive laughter that accompanied such comments, not just the words themselves. It's hard to imagine Jesus and the apostles snickering in dismissive tones as he told them about fools and swine.

[+Link of Hyrule]

And saying nonbelievers are amoral because they don't base their morality on the Bible is not ridicule?

And when have I said that non-believers are amoral?

[+Link of Hyrule]

Who said that? I want to like their post.

It's about two thirds of the way into the podcast.

[+Liquid Gardens]

Fair point. That wasn't the only time in the podcast that someone said something though. And I suppose there's also the derisive laughter that accompanied such comments, not just the words themselves. It's hard to imagine Jesus and the apostles snickering in dismissive tones as he told them about fools and swine.

Fair enough, I can see how repetitive mocking or ridicule can be annoying. As far as the Bible, you really don't think the fools and swine references aren't dismissive? Jesus may not be dismissive of non-believers in the sense that salvation is available to them, but he's certainly dismissive of any type of actual reasoning as to why people wouldn't believe in him; a good guy, Jesus, but a proficient debater he is not, he's more attracted to declarations. I'd rather Jesus engage in some juvenile snickering then judgmental name calling, and I can imagine that snickering a lot easier than I can imagine the perfect font of goodness doing and saying a few of the things attributed to him.

[+Link of Hyrule]

Fair enough, I can see how repetitive mocking or ridicule can be annoying. As far as the Bible, you really don't think the fools and swine references aren't dismissive?

Not in the context of his comments. He doesn't say "non-believers are swine", he says "don't throw your pearls at swine". In context, he's telling them that some people simply won't listen to you regardless of what is said, they'll just trample over it like a herd of swine. I don't want to name names, but throughout my close to ten years on UM there have been some to whom this passage is referencing. Just to be clear, you aren't among them, you are a joy to speak with, LG, and I relish the chance to discuss and even learn from you.

Jesus may not be dismissive of non-believers in the sense that salvation is available to them, but he's certainly dismissive of any type of actual reasoning as to why people wouldn't believe in him; a good guy, Jesus, but a proficient debater he is not, he's more attracted to declarations. I'd rather Jesus engage in some juvenile snickering then judgmental name calling, and I can imagine that snickering a lot easier than I can imagine the perfect font of goodness doing and saying a few of the things attributed to him.

He wasn't a debater, but he was intelligent enough to see that those who asked him questions often had crossed motives and were trying to trap him into saying something that would incriminate himself either against the Jews or against the Roman authorities (both of which would cause a stir). Actually, as I think on it that would make him a very adept debater.

And obviously this is a matter of opinion but I can easily see a "perfect font of goodness" in Jesus.

[+Sherapy]

I just finished listening to the podcast. Some interesting material. I know that this needs to be "entertaining" or else no one would listen, and I know that most of the listeners would be sceptics too, but I think they occasionally (not always, but occasionally) cross the line into ridicule of beliefs (one example that stuck out was "the Lord works in delirious ways" - it's not necessary to say this unless you're trying to ridicule those who believe it). And this is probably a result of where they hail from (well, the dude from Texas at least) but their references to Christians tended to revolved primarily around the uber-fundamentalist Christians ("if it ain't from Jesus, it's from the Devil" being one among many such comments).

That said, as I listened to the comments I was continually reminded of a Proverb in the Bible - The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him ~ Proverbs 18:17. Remember that everything they say is not necessarily irrefutable (the most obvious is their choice to rely on a 10th Century AD text to refer to the serpent in the Garden of Eden, surely they need something less removed from the events to base their comments on, but instead of being told this all we are told is that it is a reference to "Talmudic tradition") and since all of those in the podcast were non-believers, naturally there's no one to state the case for the opposition. There's far too much in the recording for me to personally do so I'll just leave it be.

As I said, there's some good information in there as well. Thanks for sharing

~ Regards, PA

I agree with you PA, it is not nessecary to ridicule to bring up points, to counter points, or to question points, or to get a conversation going.

[+DieChecker]

I've read several reviews online and not amazingly Christian reviewers call it bad.

The problem with someone trying to prove someone like Jesus is a myth, is that usually they are as rabid to prove it is true, and thus accept shaky evidence as completely true, and accept assumptions that may be simple coincidence as logical statements and deep truths. Making them as bad as any Fundamentalist Christian who tries to refute them.

I'd listen to the podcast, and even read his book, but I simply don't have time.

I'd like to see a good secular book written about why Jesus was a myth by someone who doesn't Obviously have an ax to grind, or a horse in the race.

Edited November 6, 2014 by DieChecker

[Davros of Skaro]

It's only a matter of time.

Aron Ra-Give the Devil His Due

Edited November 6, 2014 by davros of skaro

[+Link of Hyrule]

I tried listening through it, Davros. It was interesting to hear about Satanists driving over stone tablets, and I actually laughed (despite the theologically incorrect interpretation) at the idea of replacing it with the "other" commandments. I stopped, however, when he mentioned the Peace symbol and how Christians in Oklahoma treat it like "an upside down cross with the arms broken" and thus Satanic. I knew from there that whatever he may or may not say about Christianity has no bearing about what I actually believe, but about what some people in America can sometimes believe.

I found it interesting he shared a story about the Satanists (and object that the number 42 is symbolic of only atheists, as a theist I object to this - I LOVE the number 42 and its use in a book I tend to enjoy [heck, it's where my username and signature comes from]) and how 600 Christians turned up to protest, some even from interstate. When he shared that the Christians began arguing with each other about minor theological matters I began to reflect on how things are in Australia. Just a few months ago I attended a conference run by the Presbyterian church of Australia. The keynote speaker was the former Archbishop of Sydney. Anglican Archbishop, that is. And there were Anglicans, Baptists, Presbyterians, and some other denominations I'm not quite sure I recall attending. When I used to live in Sydney, things were very similar, except on a larger scale. The conferences there had many protestant denominations attending and a smattering of independent churches.

No one argued with each other. Regardless of denomination we greeted each other as members of the body of Christ, brothers and sisters in the same faith. So there's another difference, assuming that the level of argument outside the Oklahoma Civic Centre was as intense as portrayed in the video.

Edited November 6, 2014 by Paranoid Android

[Davros of Skaro]

How a "Blood Sacrifice" makes sense in this day and age I will never know.

[+Link of Hyrule]

How a "Blood Sacrifice" makes sense in this day and age I will never know.

Try looking at it from our perspective, that's how I learned from others of different faiths as to why what they believed made sense to them. I didn't change my beliefs to what they believe, but I know WHY it makes sense to them and respect the beliefs they chose to uphold as true. Edited November 6, 2014 by Paranoid Android

[Davros of Skaro]

Yes that's it.

Magical and wishful thinking.

[White Crane Feather]

I often do find it strange how people claiming logical superiority riddle their arguments with fallacious arguments. Does it not look silly to claim logic in the same sentence as a fallacy?

[+Liquid Gardens]

Not in the context of his comments. He doesn't say "non-believers are swine", he says "don't throw your pearls at swine". In context, he's telling them that some people simply won't listen to you regardless of what is said, they'll just trample over it like a herd of swine. I don't want to name names, but throughout my close to ten years on UM there have been some to whom this passage is referencing. Just to be clear, you aren't among them, you are a joy to speak with, LG, and I relish the chance to discuss and even learn from you.

Thanks for the kind words, PA, and back at ya.

I guess I may read that swine quote slightly differently, I don't think just that it's some people won't listen to you, I thought it's also that people will listen to you but not believe you. But that line somewhat stands a little isolated from the verses surrounding it, so your interpretation may be correct.

And obviously this is a matter of opinion but I can easily see a "perfect font of goodness" in Jesus.

I see the goodness also in most things attributed to him. As an aside, I always thought that the overturning of the moneychangers' tables in the temple was a little I guess non-godly and a little petulant and tantrum-y. Seems odd coming from the guy who also instructs people to pray in their closets.

[Doug1029]

I stopped, however, when he mentioned the Peace symbol and how Christians in Oklahoma treat it like "an upside down cross with the arms broken" and thus Satanic.

He was right about that. That's exactly what our biblically illiterate fundamentalists do and not just in Oklahoma.

The Peace Sign was originally used at a nuclear disarmament conference in France in the 1950s. It is composed of the semaphore letter N (the chevron), the semaphore letter D (the vertical shaft) and the circle. Originally it was displayed as a red symbol superimposed on a black-and-white drawing of a mushroom cloud. The circle is the Greek symbol of totality, meaning "all that is." The N stands for "Nuclear" and the D for "Disarmament." Thus, the Peace Sign reads: "Total Nuclear Disarmament."

It is interesting to note that fundamentalists consider nuclear disarmament to be the devil's work.

Doug

[+Link of Hyrule]

As an aside, I always thought that the overturning of the moneychangers' tables in the temple was a little I guess non-godly and a little petulant and tantrum-y. Seems odd coming from the guy who also instructs people to pray in their closets.

The appropriate term here is "righteous anger". The dwelling place of God had been turned into a marketplace, the son of God deserves to be righteously angry about that.

For the record, praying in ones closet simply means that we should do good for its own sake, not because it will make as look righteous.

And sorry I didn't quote the rest of your post, there's just nothing more I could add that hasn't been said already. Best wishes,