If God Exists

[beowulf]

Read the New Testament...okay, that is your homework assignment. When you have finished reading Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John...come back and tell me you still think the Bible best describes the antichrist as Jesus.

I have read the New Testament and found it to be after the fact (epigraphologists believe the earliest "gospel" was written after 80 CE and the last was written in 120 CE) mythology written by people who were not witnesses of the acts, nor is it based on more that hearsay. There has to be a "Christ" before there can be an "Anti-Christ". Since there has been no Christ, it logically follows that there has been no Anti-Christ and won't be until the former comes.

[Stellar]

They did more than lie and commit idolatry, and lying for self-gain is evil. 

I dont believe lying justifies the death penalty. Also, did all the children and babies justify it too?

There would still be scientists if everyone followed God's rules. 

Yes, there would; however, progress would have been slowed. Lets take a page from the history of religion itsself. See anything referencing Gallileo.

[nate0192]

They did more than lie and commit idolatry, and lying for self-gain is evil. 

I dont believe lying justifies the death penalty. Also, did all the children and babies justify it too?

Lying doesn't justify the death penalty, but they did more than just lie and not believe.

There would still be scientists if everyone followed God's rules. 

Yes, there would; however, progress would have been slowed. Lets take a page from the history of religion itsself. See anything referencing Gallileo.

Another Jewish belief is that people who didn't have a chance to have a life get reincarnated.

[Stellar]

Lying doesn't justify the death penalty, but they did more than just lie and not believe.

Name one that warrants the death penalty that it is reasonable to assume everyone commited.

[nate0192]

One sin isn't enough to deserve death, but there are three sins that you aren't allowed to do even to save your own life: murder, commit idolatry, or rebel against God.

[Stellar]

And you're telling me that EVERYONE on the planets, during the time of the flood, (even the children) committed those 3 sins?

[Q-La]

The whole concept of damnation, death and salvation is related to the original sin commited by the first humans, and that all mankind thereafter went into a state that does not warrant eternal life anymore. That is, everyone will die a second death after this life. Everyone was despicable in God's eye except a few righteous ones upon God laid a plan buiding up to Jesus' time. If you do not believe that mankind has been in a less than gracious state than the whole point of damnation salvation, this life and after, is pointless.

Edited August 31, 2004 by Q-La

[Consummate Deist]

If you do not believe that mankind has been in a less than gracious state than the whole point of damnation salvation, this life and after, is pointle

No it only means that the Christ Cultist take on the matter is wrong. No were in the OT or in any of Jesus's words was Original sin broached. Only "Saint" Augustine mentioned the matter, centuries later....

[nate0192]

And you're telling me that EVERYONE on the planets, during the time of the flood, (even the children) committed those 3 sins?

249569[/snapback]

That story was exaggerated by the time it made it into the bible. It only covered the area of land where the Mediterranean lived today.

http://ancienthistory.about.com/cs/floodmyth/a/aa072997.htm

http://www.calvin.edu/archive/asa/199604/0276.html

[Stellar]

And you're telling me that EVERYONE on the planets, during the time of the flood, (even the children) committed those 3 sins?

249569[/snapback]

That story was exaggerated by the time it made it into the bible. It only covered the area of land where the Mediterranean lived today.

http://ancienthistory.about.com/cs/floodmyth/a/aa072997.htm

http://www.calvin.edu/archive/asa/199604/0276.html

250453[/snapback]

How much else in the Bible is exagerated...?

[MandyBee]

I feel a little bad for Jesus. He's either being worshipped or called a liar. I don't know how many people were around when Christ was walking on earth but I sure wasn't. So, unless someone on earth is thousands of years old, no one knows much about Jesus except what has been told to them through the Bible.

Who is to say that Jesus ran around screaming at the top of his lungs that he was the son of God and that he should be worshipped? All anyone knows is what the Bible says. I wasn't around when that book was dropped from the sky but I like to think that it was written by a bunch of disciples who really liked what Jesus had to say but didn't quite get it. I really have nothing to back up my little ideas, that's just what I think.

If you wanted to teach others the "right" way to live because you felt it would enlighten them but throughout history your whole life was blown out of proportion, turning you into a god-like figure, wouldn't you be a little angry at everyone saying that you were a big fraud when you never claimed to be anything but a teacher? (Biggest run-on sentence of my life.) Have a little sympathy for the poor guy.

This is just my reply to the first post (by TraJik) where it was said that Jesus could be considered the anti-Christ, if there was one.

As for the beginning of your post, I often wonder that myself. That's why I believe that the Bible is a highly stylized history book. I don't understand why God would show Himself during the times of the Bible but never after that time or before in the apparent, in-your-face way that He showed up according to the disciples. I, nonetheless, still believe that there is a God or gods or goddesses, someone or something that holds everyone and everything together. Or maybe it's just love. How cute.

[Consummate Deist]

That's why I believe that the Bible is a highly stylized history book.

Archaeologists and historians will quickly tell you that a history book it ain't! Most of what is in it can't be verified and modern theory is that it is little more than a historical novel.

[LoPar]

The bible is a historical novel.....

Aren't most history books novels? Most history books have a slant towards the writer of the book. The fact that a variety of of individuals all found it compelling to write about an individual, Jesus, at approximately the same time leads one to think there must have been something special about him.

Of course this must be tempered by the fact that, as with most history books, the later editors probably utilized some literal freedom while compiling the various 'stories' into the bible as it is known today.

[Stellar]

Aren't most history books novels?  Most history books have a slant towards the writer of the book.  The fact that a variety of of individuals all found it compelling to write about an individual, Jesus, at approximately the same time leads one to think there must have been something special about him. 

251269[/snapback]

Most history books arent novels... they're just biased. I'll never forget how my elementary history books kept portraying the french as the innocent victims of evil english oppression in the new world.

Anyway, a variety of people worked on LOTR... does that mean its true too!?

[Consummate Deist]

The fact that a variety of of individuals all found it compelling to write about an individual, Jesus, at approximately the same time leads one to think there must have been something special about him.

The fact that a “variety of individuals” found it compelling to write about an individual, Adolph Hitler, at approximately the same time leads one to think there must have been something special about him. No I am not comparing Hitler to Jesus, just making a point…..there may or may not have been something special about him and even if there was, it wasn’t necessarily something nice! There are many that do not believe that the individual known as Jesus of Nazareth even existed…..there is no secular and contemporary evidence of his existence.

[beowulf]

Aren't most history books novels? Most history books have a slant towards the writer of the book.

Here is what the British Historian Dr. M.D. Magee has to say about history:

Every generation rewrites history from its own point of view, and every historian worth reading will be expressing a viewpoint. History from a viewpoint is more interesting history than the tepid variety, and so more likely to be read. If history is not read, it might as well not have been written. So, those who read it must reach their own conclusions from reading different viewpoints. Historians are probably no more prejudiced, blind or wilful than anyone else, but, in as much as they are, their work can justifiably be criticized. Once they are published in journals or books, these products of preoccupation and bias are the common property of all. Those that see prejudice in them can expose it, and can write an alternative history giving another view. Others can look on in concern or amusement or can join in the fun, if they wish. Often alleged bias amounts to criticisms that assail irrelevancies or straw dolls pulled out of the minutiae of the endeavour. A serious attempt to right the supposed wrongs can however progress understanding of the period in question.

and this is his take on the historical accuracy of the bible:

The plain fact is that Jericho had no walls after the Middle Bronze Age and the biblical story is mythology, less historically accurate than Homer’s Iliad, which no one believed as history but which was vindicated when Troy was actually found a hundred years ago.

[green_dude777]

Just a questions Beowulf, did you used to believe the ancient city of Babylon a myth? The majority used to until it was found.

[aquatus1]

Are you sure? I hadn't heard of the discovery of Babylon. Do you have any good links to it?

[beowulf]

did you used to believe the ancient city of Babylon a myth? The majority used to until it was found.

I have heard this from so many Christian Apologists, so I took the time about two years ago to make an in depth study of the matter. There is a clear historical "paper trail" concerning Babylon and Babylonia (the city and the empire). No qualified historian from Heroditus to Magee has ever questioned the existence of Babylon, the location was lost for about 1500 years, but the former existence was not questioned at all. This is a common ploy of Christian Apologists, they make statements such as this which can be seen as partly true and twist them around to make it look like the evil skeptics and critics are so stupid that they believed this or they believed that. They like to say that historians are so stupid to say that there were no camels in Abraham's time, when it can be proven that camels were domesticated 2500 years ago. What historians said was that camels were not introduced into Egypt (Palestine was a province of Egypt from 2000 BCE to 900 BCE) until 1300 BCE, which is over 1000 years after Abraham. So the mention of Abraham owning so many camels is one of the many anachronisms of the OT.

[Consummate Deist]

I have heard this from so many Christian Apologists

Yeah, the Apologists know that the faithful will accept what they say without questioning it, and hopefully the skeptics will be buffaloed by their countenance of knowledge in the matter. This works great with the faithful but the skeptics generally know better.

[aquatus1]

So Babylon, the city, has indeed been discovered? Does anybody know where it is located? I was under the impression that it was still lost somewhere.

[beowulf]

It is located 90km south of modern Baghdad and has been there for a long long time

[Velikovsky]

Okay here's my beliefs on the subject. I believe that a Higher Power exists but I don't think any religion has it right. I think we should follow what we feel is right. Truly understanding God can only come from inside yourself, not a book or another person.

[saucy]

A lot of different cities have been found, actually most of the cities mentioned in the bible have been found. Some have been buried and thought to be a contradiction for many years until they are found.

Jesus isn't the messiah? Come on. He fulfilled ALL 300+ prophecies written about the messiah in the Old Testament. They were all written before he was born and all of them happened. People might say he knew things he would have to say and do to get them fulfilled, but many of them were out of his control, like where he was born, who he was born to, which line of blood he would be born into, up to how he would die and even down to the last few words he said.

Are you telling me that the Jews believe in evolution until Christians came around and messed all that up? Anyone else catch that? You've got to be kidding me! Evolution wasn't even a theory until 150 years ago. What did people believe before that? A literal six-day creation.

[beowulf]

Jesus isn't the messiah? Come on. He fulfilled ALL 300+ prophecies written about the messiah in the Old Testament.

Not bad for a guy that you can't even prove ever lived. Give me one secular contemporary mention of him anywhere.....