Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Johnny Skeptic · 01-07-2010, 06:12 AM

It is no more important which sect of Christianity accurately interprets the Bible than which sect of Islam accurately interprets the Koran.

rhutchin · 01-07-2010, 06:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

We have a fixed body of data about the NT and the people who wrote it, what they thought, and what they thought they were doing.

Regarding "the people who wrote it," there is not sufficient evidence regarding who wrote the Gospels.

Roger Pearse does not say different than you. He says that we have a "fixed body of data" and does not say that this "fixed body of data" tells us who wrote the gospels. We may not know, with finality, their names, but we can know things "about the NT and the people who wrote it, what they thought, and what they thought they were doing" where this information is provided in the Bible.

rhutchin · 01-07-2010, 06:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

It is no more important which sect of Christianity accurately interprets the Bible than which sect of Islam accurately interprets the Koran.

What is important is that anyone who reads the Bible or the Koran accurately interpret it.

rhutchin · 01-07-2010, 06:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

I suggest that we get back on topic. The title of this thread is "Inauthentic sayings of Jesus." How do Christians propose that historians decide what Jesus probably said, and what he probably did not say?

The king of rabbit trails finally gets religion.

rhutchin · 01-07-2010, 06:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Let's consider a hypothetical skeptic named John Smith. John is an agnostic. He is convinced that it is a virtual certainty that no God from any religious book exists, that since the universe is infinite, an infinite number of possible Gods exist, and that if a God exists, he is deisist, and that there is not any credible evidence that the deist God poses any danger to skeptics after they die. John believes that if a God exists who will judge mankind, he will judge mankind based upon some kind of merit, not upon faith. John detests any possible God who insists upon faith without providing a lot of tangible, first hand evidence, and lots of personal, tangible conversations. John believes that there is not any fair, just, and reasonable goal that a loving, merciful God would not be able to accomplish with killing injuring and killing people with hurricanes. John believes that no God would claim that he is not the author of confusion, but frequently causes needless confusion, often even among conservative Christians, the issue of slavery over the past 2,000 years being a good example. John believes that no loving, merciful God would send people to hell for eternity without parole. John believes that a loving, merciful God would be able to achieve any fair, worthy, and just goal without injuring and killing people with hurricanes.

Since John believes that the odds are astronomical that the odds of risk are far greater from an infinite number of possible Gods than from the God of the Bible, if John should pray at all, he should first pray and ask any of the infinite possible number of Gods for mercy. Then, if he wishes, he can ask the God of the Bible for mercy with the belief that the odds are astronomical that he does not exist. I doubt that the Bible implies that it would be helpful for a man to pray like that.

While there may, hypothetically, be an infinite number of gods, the skeptic need only consider those gods who have made themselves known to people and who have made known to people that a they can seek mercy from him to escape punishment for their sins. That narrows it down considerably.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

It is interesting to note that any skeptic who has diligently studied various religions, atheism, and agnosticism in a search for the truth has in effect asked all Gods for mercy.

I don't believe it.

Johnny Skeptic · 01-07-2010, 06:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Let's consider a hypothetical skeptic named John Smith. John is an agnostic. He is convinced that it is a virtual certainty that no God from any religious book exists, that since the universe is infinite, an infinite number of possible Gods exist, and that if a God exists, he is deisist, and that there is not any credible evidence that the deist God poses any danger to skeptics after they die. John believes that if a God exists who will judge mankind, he will judge mankind based upon some kind of merit, not upon faith. John detests any possible God who insists upon faith without providing a lot of tangible, first hand evidence, and lots of personal, tangible conversations. John believes that there is not any fair, just, and reasonable goal that a loving, merciful God would not be able to accomplish with killing injuring and killing people with hurricanes. John believes that no God would claim that he is not the author of confusion, but frequently causes needless confusion, often even among conservative Christians, the issue of slavery over the past 2,000 years being a good example. John believes that no loving, merciful God would send people to hell for eternity without parole. John believes that a loving, merciful God would be able to achieve any fair, worthy, and just goal without injuring and killing people with hurricanes.

Since John believes that the odds are astronomical that the odds of risk are far greater from an infinite number of possible Gods than from the God of the Bible, if John should pray at all, he should first pray and ask any of the infinite possible number of Gods for mercy. Then, if he wishes, he can ask the God of the Bible for mercy with the belief that the odds are astronomical that he does not exist. I doubt that the Bible implies that it would be helpful for a man to pray like that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhutchin

While there may, hypothetically, be an infinite number of gods, the skeptic need only consider those gods who have made themselves known to people and who have made known to people that a they can seek mercy from him to escape punishment for their sins. That narrows it down considerably.

On the contrary, if humans are at risk from being judged by a God, the odds are astronomical that that God is not the God of the Bible. There are thousands of good reasons for people to reject the Bible.

Rather than posturing, which is not useful, I suggest that we discuss specific evidence. Let's start with the book of Genesis and see how far we have to go before you can reasonably prove any claim that you believe is important.

Johnny Skeptic · 01-07-2010, 06:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhutchin

While there may, hypothetically, be an infinite number of gods, the skeptic need only consider those gods who have made themselves known to people and who have made known to people that a they can seek mercy from him to escape punishment for their sins. That narrows it down considerably.

In 2,000 B.C., what percentage of the people in the world had heard about the God of the Bible? I assume less than 5%. Assuming 5% for the sake of argument, is it your position that God did not save any of the 95% who died without any knowledge of his specific existence?

show_no_mercy · 01-07-2010, 06:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhutchin

Quote:

Originally Posted by show_no_mercy

Deutteronomy 24 is usually cited as an explicit refutation of Christian theology. What sin did Jesus commit that entitled his death?

Cited? By whom? Nonetheless, when Paul says, the wages of sin is death, he says the same thing. What Paul says is not foreign to the OT.

Jesus committed no sin that entitled His death. Thus, His death could be a propitiation for the sins of others rather than His own.

Quote:

Originally Posted by show_no_mercy

What, exactly, does this have to do with Jesus nullifying Adam's curse - which is Christian (not Hebrew bible) theology?

When Paul says, the gift of God is eternal life, he says nothing new that was not already stated in the OT.

There is nothing about eternal life (i.e. nullifying Adam's curse) in the Hebrew bible. Outside of Genesis, Adam's sin is theologically/soteriologically irrelevant to the Hebrew bible.

avi · 01-07-2010, 06:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhutchin

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

It is no more important which sect of Christianity accurately interprets the Bible than which sect of Islam accurately interprets the Koran.

What is important is that anyone who reads the Bible or the Koran accurately interpret it.(my emphasis)

And how, do you propose, that one accomplishes this task?
Are the words different, among the different versions, of the "holy" scripture, such that one would then have confusion about the proper interpretation?

In view of Johnny Skeptic's meritorious admonition to return to the subject of the thread, let us compare some writings, attributed to Jesus, to address this question, of how one should proceed to interpret the Bible, or the Quran.

OOPS. yes, the words are different, and yes, the interpretation does have theological consequences, even for those who insist, as does rhutchin, that mere human beings can inform supernatural gods of their intent to be "saved", notwithstanding the supernatural, omnipotent god's predetermined course of action for that particular individual.

The passage is a familiar one: John 14:28, juxtaposed to John 10:30, in two different Greek texts.

Hort & Westcott:
oti o pathr meizwn mou estin
Byzantine Majority:
oti o pathr mou meizwn mou estin

Isn't it fascinating? Somewhere in time, post Constantine, someone felt uncomfortable with the lack of "mou", so, decided to insert one.

"the" father, becomes: "my" father, with a few strokes of the quill.

Even more interesting, is the opposite notion to the one expressed in John 14:28 "For the (my) father is greater than I am." That concept is brilliantly summarized by Jesus, contradicting himself, by supposedly saying in John 10:30:
egw kai o pathr en esmen
The father and I are one. Here, all of the extant Greek versions are identical, and n.b. "the" father, not "my" father.

How can one entity be identical with a second entity, and yet be dissimilar? One, or both, of these two sayings, attributed to Jesus, must be false.

avi

rhutchin · 01-07-2010, 07:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by show_no_mercy

There is nothing about eternal life (i.e. nullifying Adam's curse) in the Hebrew bible. Outside of Genesis, Adam's sin is theologically/soteriologically irrelevant to the Hebrew bible.

Then why does God send the prophets continually to Israel to complain about the sins of the people and continually call for them to repent?

Why does God make the Israelites His chosen people and want to use Israel an as example to all the other nations?

The whole of the OT is about sin and repentance and it all started with Adam.

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

01-07-2010, 06:12 AM	#101
Johnny Skeptic Banned Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Florida Posts: 19,796	It is no more important which sect of Christianity accurately interprets the Bible than which sect of Islam accurately interprets the Koran.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.