Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 03-04-2009, 06:08 PM

Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (And Why We Don't Know About Them) (or via: amazon.co.uk)

On NPR tonight or by podcast with an excerpt from chapter 4.

youngalexander · 03-04-2009, 07:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amazon

These are not idiosyncratic perspectives of just one modern scholar. As Ehrman skillfully demonstrates, they have been the standard and widespread views of critical scholars across a full spectrum of denominations and traditions. Why is it most people have never heard such things?

Why indeed?

Quote:

This is the book that pastors, educators, and anyone interested in the Bible have been waiting for

Yeah, right!

Quote:

a clear and compelling account of the central challenges we face when attempting to reconstruct the life and message of Jesus.

Quick - inform TJP immediately.:wave:

IamJoseph · 03-04-2009, 08:27 PM

The most amazing phenomenon of that author is the statement 'we can't believe eye witnesses'. Considering the claims being made - how can any eye witness even verify anything of such claims? This would be difficult to be accepted even if it occured before a million people.

The only higher amazement is that everyone in Europe believed it - via numerous rows of distant reportings again, without ever stepping in that region or asking for more evidence, and when this was in total and abject contradiction of the area's beliefs and history: some 40 years later - Rome incurred its greatest war with Judea - for exactly the antithesis of what the Gospels say; a few centuries later - islam emerged with another report in total contradiction of the Gospels. If I were an alien I'd be worried about visiting such a planet - maybe that's why we don't see any of them?

Toto · 03-04-2009, 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

The most amazing phenomenon of that author is the statement 'we can't believe eye witnesses'. Considering the claims being made - how can any eye witness even verify anything of such claims? This would be difficult to be accepted even if it occured before a million people.

The only higher amazement is that everyone in Europe believed it - via numerous rows of distant reportings again, without ever stepping in that region or asking for more evidence, and when this was in total and abject contradiction of the area's beliefs and history: some 40 years later - Rome incurred its greatest war with Judea - for exactly the antithesis of what the Gospels say; a few centuries later - islam emerged with another report in total contradiction of the Gospels. If I were an alien I'd be worried about visiting such a planet - maybe that's why we don't see any of them?

What does this have to do with the topic? Who are you claiming made the statement that we can't believe eye witnesses? What is the context? How do you get from there to Islam???

IamJoseph · 03-05-2009, 12:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

What does this have to do with the topic? Who are you claiming made the statement that we can't believe eye witnesses? What is the context? How do you get from there to Islam???

That podcast states, we can't believe eye witnesses, giving numerous reasonings for it. My context highlights a fulcrum macro contradiction hovering the author's micro issues - that it appears non-credible two religions would emerge to assume transcendency of one 2500 years precedent of it, both being mutually exclusive in their arguements - thus both cannot be right, and it appears the authors himself highlights numerous other underlying contradictions. A conclusion forcast is the next issue in such a scenario.

There is a blatancy here - but it appears an unwanted one, thus pointing to more chaos ahead: some 90% of what is held within humanity is potentially not only untrue and incorrect - but perhaps even anthitetical of what is claimed and believed. In the final count, there will be a conclusion which will be derived when so many inconsistencies are seen in the underlying micro levels - it eventually impacts the macro covering.

By reductionism it means, if two people make statements which concern a third - and both charges are fundamentally contradictory, and also independently incorrect in the veracity of each charge - the accused is right. Otherwise what is the point of the debating subject - can you see something there?

Toto · 03-05-2009, 12:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

...
By reductionism it means, if two people make statements which concern a third - and both charges are fundamentally contradictory, and also independently incorrect in the veracity of each charge - the accused is right. Otherwise what is the point of the debating subject - can you see something there?

What does this mean? Perhaps everyonle is wrong. Perhaps there are more than two people.

What is your first language?

ApostateAbe · 03-05-2009, 08:43 AM

That interview on Fresh Air is very informative. I enjoyed listening.

rlogan · 03-05-2009, 09:50 AM

I am interested in the "Why we don't know about it" explanation of Ehrmann.

As I look back at my pastors in church, I just get angry. There are a couple in particular, one a doctor of divinity, that in retrospect were clearly misleading people intentionally.

For example, every Christmas they would offer the misleading statement "Now is the time we celebrate the birth of Christ"...

Why do they state it this way? Because on the one hand it is not an outright lie, but on the other hand it serves the agenda of the Church.

Why do they not point out glaring inconsistencies? If you really are interested in Jesus, as you claim, then where is the motivation to resolve conflicts amongst representations?

Again, it does not serve the agenda of the Church.

So I am very curious if Erhmann speaks to this.

Why did my pastors intentionally mislead me? Was it because they cared so much for me that they wanted me to go to heaven? Did they deduce that misleading me was a necessary and sufficient condition for my salvation?

Or was it the offering plate?

sharrock · 03-05-2009, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rlogan

Why did my pastors intentionally mislead me? Was it because they cared so much for me that they wanted me to go to heaven? Did they deduce that misleading me was a necessary and sufficient condition for my salvation?

Or was it the offering plate?

If they got suckered into it, then they'd take you along. Either out of vindictiveness or so as not to feel alone in their stupidity.

Mind you, providing themselves with easy income might enter into it :constern01:

No Robots · 03-05-2009, 10:31 AM

The question you should ask yourself is: "What new bilge have I uncritically accepted?" Have you, for example, donated to the fund to help Richard Carrier write a book?

One's outrage at a previous deception often leads one into another, opposite deception.

03-04-2009, 06:08 PM	#1
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Ehrmann's [2009] book on contradictions in the gospels Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (And Why We Don't Know About Them) (or via: amazon.co.uk) On NPR tonight or by podcast with an excerpt from chapter 4.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-04-2009, 08:27 PM	#3
IamJoseph Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: AUSTRALIA Posts: 2,265	The most amazing phenomenon of that author is the statement 'we can't believe eye witnesses'. Considering the claims being made - how can any eye witness even verify anything of such claims? This would be difficult to be accepted even if it occured before a million people. The only higher amazement is that everyone in Europe believed it - via numerous rows of distant reportings again, without ever stepping in that region or asking for more evidence, and when this was in total and abject contradiction of the area's beliefs and history: some 40 years later - Rome incurred its greatest war with Judea - for exactly the antithesis of what the Gospels say; a few centuries later - islam emerged with another report in total contradiction of the Gospels. If I were an alien I'd be worried about visiting such a planet - maybe that's why we don't see any of them?

03-05-2009, 08:43 AM	#7
ApostateAbe Contributor Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: MT Posts: 10,656	That interview on Fresh Air is very informative. I enjoyed listening.

03-05-2009, 09:50 AM	#8
rlogan Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Alaska Posts: 9,159	I am interested in the "Why we don't know about it" explanation of Ehrmann. As I look back at my pastors in church, I just get angry. There are a couple in particular, one a doctor of divinity, that in retrospect were clearly misleading people intentionally. For example, every Christmas they would offer the misleading statement "Now is the time we celebrate the birth of Christ"... Why do they state it this way? Because on the one hand it is not an outright lie, but on the other hand it serves the agenda of the Church. Why do they not point out glaring inconsistencies? If you really are interested in Jesus, as you claim, then where is the motivation to resolve conflicts amongst representations? Again, it does not serve the agenda of the Church. So I am very curious if Erhmann speaks to this. Why did my pastors intentionally mislead me? Was it because they cared so much for me that they wanted me to go to heaven? Did they deduce that misleading me was a necessary and sufficient condition for my salvation? Or was it the offering plate?

03-05-2009, 10:31 AM	#10
No Robots Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Edmonton Posts: 5,679	The question you should ask yourself is: "What new bilge have I uncritically accepted?" Have you, for example, donated to the fund to help Richard Carrier write a book? One's outrage at a previous deception often leads one into another, opposite deception.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.