xeren

I've got a Christian friend who, after all our arguments about the reliability of the Bible, still thinks that i am insane for not believing the bible is the word of god because of all the "evidence", like Paul's testimony, and the empty tomb, and the 500 people Jesus supposedly appeared to, and "why would someone lie about jesus' resurrection if they knew they would be heavily persecuted for doing so, so they must not have been lying?"

Now I've completely given up trying to convince him that Xtianity is a load of crap, his faith brings him too much happiness for him to want to think critically about the whole thing.

But what argument could i give to him that would at least show that I'm not insane for not believing the Bible is the word of god?

Any takers? Thanks in advance.

K

xeren:

I don't think there's anything you can say. These people seem to live in a dream world where they can't see that their mythical stories and wacky apologetics are nearly identical to those of all the other religions out there.

They see evidence because the presuppose the truth. Yet they can easily point out the same failings of individuals of other religions.

I would say you should probably just agree not to discuss it.

Godless Dave

K's right, there's nothing you can say.

But if you're a glutton for punishment, you can respond to this:
By asking "Why would Joseph Smith lie about finding the Book of Mormon under a hilll if he knew he would be persecuted for it? Mormonism must be true!"

There's no difference between people believing Jesus's followers and people believing Joseph Smith. But I'm positive your friend won't get it.

Amen-Moses

The answer I got to this tact was "Yes but that's different because the Mormons are wrong!" and he actually said it with a straight face!

Amen-Moses

FOGuy

You didn't say what types of arguments you've used but when I find myself in a similar position I just ask simple questions. Such as:

What day was Jesus born? They will probably say Dec.25. Ask them to show you in the Bible where it says that. (I've found that most people who claim the Bible to be the word of God rarely read it)

Then ask what is his date of death? The response is usually either Good Friday or Easter. The better question is to ask why does his date of death (and resurrection) always CHANGE each year?


But my favorite one is this: What does the Bible say Jesus was doing when he was 18yrs old? How about 15? or 21? or 25?

Well it doesn't say anything. There is absolutely NO record of Jesus' life between the ages of 12 & 30 either in the Bible or anywhere else. The only mention of Jesus at 12 is by Luke. Only one of the 4 so-called 'witnesses'. So here is a man whose appearance on earth is said to be so stupendous that his birth was foretold and hailed as a miracle - the saviour of men!! Yet somehow we completely lose track of him for 18yrs!! One day when "he was about 30" he shows up again. How could these 4 supposed gospel writers, indeed, DISCIPLES, just lose track of him and not write a word about him during that time?

I usually just get blank stares. That, or the stock answer "God moves in mysterious ways".

Your friend might also be interested to know that the story of Jesus is paralleled quite closely by the story of Horus of Egypt. In fact in the 'history' of Horus (not real history, just myth) he also suddenly goes from the age of 12 to the age of 30. This 'history' was extant some 3000yrs BEFORE the alleged birth of Christ. There are many more similarities between the two. Enough so as to call the story of Jesus a COPY of the story of Horus. For a good reference check out Gerald Massey's 2 volume 'Ancient Egypt, Light of the World' written in 1905. Especially Vol. 2.

Plebe

Your friend's mind sounds 'closed' for the moment. If you wish to persist, here is a cut and paste of some non-tract materials:
Here is a partial listing of
non-tract materials I have stored on disk ready for
printout for proselytizers/[what I call "Malarkey
Masters"] visiting my door which
demonstrate quite well the flaws of the Bible and any
apologetics:

<a href="http://www.geocities.com/phineasbg2/wyd.html" target="_blank">http://www.geocities.com/phineasbg2/wyd.html</a> Parody on
a Jack Chick tract popular with proselytizers.

<a href="http://www.jhuger.com/pamphlets.mv" target="_blank">http://www.jhuger.com/pamphlets.mv</a>

<a href="http://www.ffrf.org/nontracts/" target="_blank">http://www.ffrf.org/nontracts/</a>

<a href="http://www.ethicalatheist.com/docs/links.html" target="_blank">http://www.ethicalatheist.com/docs/links.html</a>

A group for scholarly study:

<a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JesusMysteries/" target="_blank">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JesusMysteries/</a>

<a href="http://www.atheists.org/church/twelve.html" target="_blank">http://www.atheists.org/church/twelve.html</a>

<a href="http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/maccoby.htm" target="_blank">http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/maccoby.htm</a> What a real Jew sees and knows about Christianity when they read the “New Testament.”

<a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/joseph_wheless/forgery_in_christianity/index.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/joseph_wheless/forgery_in_christianity/index.shtml</a>
Forgery in Christianity a history.

<a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/m_m_mangasarian/truth_about_jesus.html" target="_blank">http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/m_m_mangasarian/truth_about_jesus.html</a> [This is great, gives a 'Parable' comparing Apollos to Christ then following the parable, a detailed discussion about Christianity.]

<a href="http://home.earthlink.net/~kirby/xtianity/index.html" target="_blank">http://home.earthlink.net/~kirby/xtianity/index.html</a>
Evolution vs. Creationism

<a href="http://philosophy.wisc.edu/forster/220/default.htm" target="_blank">http://philosophy.wisc.edu/forster/220/default.htm</a>

Resurrection debate:

<a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/dan_barker/barker_horner.html" target="_blank">http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/dan_barker/barker_horner.html</a>

<a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jeff_lowder/jesus_resurrection/chap4.html" target="_blank">http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jeff_lowder/jesus_resurrection/chap4.html</a>

diana

I'm sure you know these things already, xeren, but I thought I'd respond as the thoughts came to me.

Would that be Paul's "testimony" that he never even met this person called Jesus?

"I know it's so!"

"How?"

"Because I never met him!"

This one has always knocked me on my ass. We have proof that Jesus existed and was all he said he was because there's no body? What?!

Who were all so moved by the experience that not a single one mentioned it to anyone or wrote down a word of it. Good evidence there.

A couple of responses I'm just pulling from my colon this minute:

1. Many people have given their lives in situations where they knew the cost but wished to give others hope where there was little or none.

2. How many people give their lives for what they believe to be true but have no proof of? Just about every major religion (and most minor ones) out there, I'll warrant.

Most people are happy in their fantasy worlds.

Ask him if he believes the Koran is the word of Allah. How would he go about proving to a Muslim that he wasn't insane for not believing the Koran is the word of Allah.

Any given argument he makes for the "authenticity" of the bible you can counter.

Or just send him to us, tell him to be respectful so he doesn't end up in the Lion's Den, and engage us in discussion--if he won't let you talk long enough to defend yourself.

Even when people aren't interested in coming here, it's often enough to simply explain to them that you have answers if they'd shut their yaps and open their ears long enough to hear.

But then, I have more techniques for making people edge away nervously than I do for engaging them in fruitful conversation. They don't usually walk away thinking I'm insane, though. Just angry and aggressive. It's a tradeoff.

d

xeren

Thanks guys!

Celsus

Actually, there's plenty of reasons why Christians, initially, would preach a resurrection. Firstly, Jewish and Roman relations were getting increasingly tense during this period, and Christians would have had every motive for differentiating themselves from the Jews to avoid persecution. What differentiated Christianity most from Judaism at the time? A belief in not just a miracle-worker (there were plenty of these in Judaism), but a fully resurrected miracle worker, one who created a non-Judaic covenant, one who had power over death, etc.

Secondly, there were thousands of cults, both secret and public during that time. Christian persecution did not come about till Nero (c.64CE), by which time it may have been too late. Their preaching already condemned them. However, pseudo-epistles like 1 Peter exhorted them to suffer for Christ, with the promise of eternal life in paradise. Surely, if they believed that, temporary persecution hardly mattered against an eternity of paradise.

Thirdly, Jewish Christians were eventually replaced by Gentile Christians as the backbone for this fledgling church. Fraught tension between these two groups over eating habits and circumcision needed to be resolved. Simple solution (for the Gentiles/Hellenised Jews)? Emphasise death and resurrection as the final atoning sacrifice that superceded the Law. And who better than the self-appointed apostle, ex-Pharisee and ex-persecutor of Christians to preach this sort of message?

So there are plenty of important reasons why preaching a resurrection might have been necessary. The threat of persecution decades after Jesus' death is conflated as if the stoning of Stephen (a later interpolation according to Eisenman) was somehow representative of the Church right from the beginning.

Keith Russell

Greetings:

We've already seen what 'believers' can do, when their own lives have no value to them, except for the damage their deaths can cause.

And, if willingness to die for one's belief is the measure of the truth of that belief, then--by that 'logic'--Christians should accept that Islam is 'more true' than Christianity; haven't we seen more Islamic martyrs (or would-be martyrs) lately, than Christian ones?

Keith.