FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 06-11-2007, 08:17 PM   #81
Regular Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Myrtle Beach, sc
Posts: 102
Default

The scriptural evidence clearly shows exactly how many Church Members were baptized in water by John the Baptist!
Yet ask almost any Fundamental Preacher or Catholic and they won't know!

The exact number is easy, it's zero!
John was dead before the founding of the church at Pentecost!

Jesus said "Oh this Rock, I will (future tense) build my church, not "I have" built it! The blending of old with new is silly, yet that is what most teach, sad to say, but then most teach that God told David to have solomon build a Temple, which is far from the truth. Solomon wasn't the Son that was to build said Temple!
Mr. Logic is offline  
Old 06-11-2007, 10:53 PM   #82
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Falls Creek, Oz.
Posts: 11,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by mountainman View Post
I want to know why any of the prenicene christian authors and
publishers, quoted by EUsebius and yourself, perhaps Iraeneus,
did not associate their own version of "christian canon" in a
common physical publication which included the older Hebrew
texts. Why was the "new" and the "old" unassociated by a
common physical publication by anyone? Ireneus? Origen?
ETC? for hundreds of years???
That question is very difficult to answer. All that is known is that the collusion of Church and State is a formidable force.
One obvious answer to this question that cannot be immediately
discounted, despite the tradition to the contrary, is that there
were in fact no prenicene christian authors, and that Eusebius
simply attached names and dates to a pseudo-history.

I'd suggest that until this simple and straightforward politically
motivated fraud can be discounted, with the appropriate
provision of archeological and/or scientifically estimable evidence
for the existence of anything whatsoever christian in
the 300 years prenicene epoch, the tendering of an associated
pseudo-history (by Eusebius, under order of Constantine) is
plausible.


Dont hold your breath for this evidence aa5874.
mountainman is offline  
Old 06-12-2007, 12:32 AM   #83
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: N/A
Posts: 4,370
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vicious Love View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Pearse View Post
Is he? Where?
My bad, I actually misread that.
It happens...

Quote:
Though I still find it bizarre that an omnipotent god would wait more than 300 years to divinely inspire His followers to separate the "correct" gospels from the apocrypha, especially if this god wanted His word to get out to as many people as possible.
Well, are we sure that this is what happened, factually? (Whether in fact the Creator of the Universe *must* do this or that or else not be God I don't know, not being a divinely inspired prophet myself).

Irenaeus ca. 180 knows of 4 and only 4, and the idea of more is incredible to him. He has apostolic contacts, of course. Tertullian ca. 200 is working with much the same NT as we are. I'm not sure that second century fathers major on the bible alone in this way anyway -- they consider it inspired, but they also have oral tradition of only a generation or so in their own churches as to what the apostolic message was.

Does anyone in antiquity worry about this one at all? If not, I think this tends to be a sign of anachronism; i.e. that the argument has implicit assumptions not relevant to the question?

Incidentally the idea that the apocrypha were only removed at Nicaea is a legend, first recorded in the 9th century in the Vetus Synodicon (details here, at the end). I got fed up with all the fairy-stories about Nicaea a few years back. They're never referenced to the primary sources, after all. So I went and looked up every contemporary account (say up to a century after) of the Council. That page has the details so everyone can do it themselves and see. (Gelasius of Cyzicus isn't on there, since no English translation exists, but I did look at it). Whatever our views, surely we all want to get the raw facts right?

All the best,

Roger Pearse
Roger Pearse is offline  
Old 06-12-2007, 03:10 PM   #84
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London UK
Posts: 16,024
Default

Quote:
the idea of more is incredible to him
And very explicable to us - he believed four was a holy number and therefore there could only be four gospels. But we have more than that ...therefore Iraneous got something wrong. What else might he have misunderstood?
Clivedurdle is offline  
Old 06-12-2007, 03:58 PM   #85
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Bernardino, Calif.
Posts: 5,435
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouseau View Post
it is an organic whole like nothing else in the cosmos.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Shaver View Post
Am I being unreasonable if I think otherwise?
I think you are being worse than unreasonable, because you have ignored the evidence already presented, that the Bible is the world's best-seller
What makes its commercial success any indication of its organic wholeness?

If the Bible were not the world's best-seller, then obviously some other book would be. Are you prepared to say that whatever other book that might have been, it would necessarily have been an organic whole like nothing else in the universe?
Doug Shaver is offline  
Old 06-12-2007, 04:23 PM   #86
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 1,918
Default

[QUOTE=Doug Shaver;4530843]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouseau View Post
it is an organic whole like nothing else in the cosmos.

I think you are being worse than unreasonable, because you have ignored the evidence already presented, that the Bible is the world's best-seller
Quote:
What makes its commercial success any indication of its organic wholeness?
How many best sellers are 'a mess'?

Quote:
If the Bible were not the world's best-seller, then obviously some other book would be. Are you prepared to say that whatever other book that might have been, it would necessarily have been an organic whole like nothing else in the universe?
No. I only say in this context that it isn't a mess, as claimed, and as has not been proved. However, its organic wholeness is apparent to even an untutored eye. Serious study reveals detail that is compelling. Nothing else compares, in literature, in other religions.
Clouseau is offline  
Old 06-13-2007, 12:12 AM   #87
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: N/A
Posts: 4,370
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clivedurdle View Post
Quote:
the idea of more is incredible to him
And very explicable to us - he believed four was a holy number and therefore there could only be four gospels.
I'm not sure that this is what Irenaeus says. He draws an analogy to the four winds. But the point surely is not whether or not we agree with his comment -- not an argument -- but what it tells us about the position in his own day. If it was possible to compare them to the foundation of the world, without laughter, then these are things that are long accepted.

Quote:
But we have more than that ...therefore Iraneous got something wrong.
Well, we do not. Nor did he.

All the best,

Roger Pearse
Roger Pearse is offline  
Old 06-13-2007, 12:17 AM   #88
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Falls Creek, Oz.
Posts: 11,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouseau View Post
However, its organic wholeness is apparent to even an untutored eye. Serious study reveals detail that is compelling. Nothing else compares, in literature, in other religions.
Organic wholeness? Compelling?

The emperor Julian was well versed in other religions and was
arguably the most well read and studious Roman emperor.
What do you think he meant when he wrote, c.362 CE:
It is, I think, expedient to set forth to all mankind
the reasons by which I was convinced that
the fabrication of the Galilaeans
is a fiction of men composed by wickedness.

Though it has in it nothing divine,
by making full use of that part of the soul
which loves fable and is childish and foolish,
it has induced men to believe
that the monstrous tale is truth.
mountainman is offline  
Old 06-13-2007, 12:25 AM   #89
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Falls Creek, Oz.
Posts: 11,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Masorah613 View Post
The fact that the grandsons of Jude was known to live during the days of Caesar Domitian is recorded in Historia Ecclesiae, 3.20.
Things recorded in H.E. may be assumed to be factual.
But that is about the limit of things. And it certainly
does not imply that things recorded in H.E. are, in fact,
ancient historical facts.
mountainman is offline  
Old 06-13-2007, 01:49 AM   #90
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouseau View Post

How many best sellers are 'a mess'?
I can thank of at least one -the Da Vinci Code.

What conclusion would you draw from the factoid that the Bible is the book most often shoplifted?
Toto is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:24 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.