I think he's another religion.

Here you can discuss differences in belief between different denominations, or other religions and Christianity. This is an informational forum. Always be courteous and polite, and respect other people's views and values.<P>Permanent Residents may only reply to posts here; Native Residents may initiate & reply to posts here.

Moderators: jochanaan, MatthewNeal, jimmy, natman, Senior Moderator, Moderators

Re: I think he's another religion.

Postby natman » Sat Jul 26, 2014 9:34 am

bn2bnude wrote:For instance, how do you reconcile these two verses in Proverbs:
Proverbs 26:4-5 wrote:4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.

5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.


To me, these "apparently" contradictory statements are saying that we should use wisdom and discernment when dealing with foolish people. We should not respond to them in kind, using the same "foolish" reasoning that they do. But (if directed by the Holy Spirit), respond to them taking into account their foolishness.

bn2bnude wrote:When you start seeing all the places in the Bible that the story being told doesn't match the beliefs your are told to be certain about (and yes, there are plenty) you have two choices -- continue on, embracing the doubt that was introduced or give it all up.


Can you give us some further examples (since, as you say, "there are plenty")?
SON-cerely,
Nathan Powers

Get exposed to the sun, and get exposed to the Son.
User avatar
natman
Mayor (Site Admin)
 
Posts: 7257
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 3:48 pm
Location: Houston, Texas

Re: I think he's another religion.

Postby Bare_Truth » Sat Jul 26, 2014 10:20 am

bn2bnude wrote:Certainty, on the other hand, is long heralded as the state we should live in.

We are so inundated with people selling certainty -- "If you died tonight where would you spend eternity". It appeals to the gnostic in all of us... "I KNOW I'm going to heaven". What happens when your mom gets cancer, however, or your fired from your job or you loose your house to a wild fire. Why do bad things happen to good people? The answer from those how pedal certainty is often "God has a plan" or "God must want your mom in Heaven" (if so, why did she have to suffer to get there? He must not have really loved her!)....

Faith and Certainty are, however, two different things. .............
I suspect the problem Ehrman had (pulling us back on topic) from reading and hearing from him is this. He came from a background where certainty was a virtue.


Now I think we are on the same page of the hymnal, maybe a little off key one to another, but the same page. The CERTAITY issue I see is often an over simplification used by pastors who lack the mental acumen to expound the full depth of the scriptures or who condescendingly think their congregation could not handle it. Of course in the latter case they may sometimes be right, but not because of innate lack of ability to understand but that the congregants come from a culture where they have had the oversimplifications drummed into them.
Paul, in Ephesians 4: wrote: 11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;
15 But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ:

What is being described here is a continuing education and maturing process not the repeated hammering of kindergarten over simplifications. Yes there is a simplicity in Christ but there is also a fullness of education and mature understanding and it take years and going beyond just a few simple concepts if one is to become mature.
why else is it that in 2 Timothy 2: Paul wrote: 15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
Yes, Timothy was being developed for the ministry but is not that sort of scriptural knowledge intended for all Christians? And study beyond just a few simplistic basics is needed for spiritual maturity.


bn2bnude wrote:For instance, how do you reconcile these two verses in Proverbs:
Proverbs 26:4-5 wrote:4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.
5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.

I should think that would be obvious, that the way to deal with someone who is being foolish is situational and often dependent on the nature of the foolish one, and also if there is an audience he/she is playing to , etc.

bn2bnude wrote:When you start seeing all the places in the Bible that the story being told doesn't match the beliefs your are told to be certain about (and yes, there are plenty) you have two choices -- continue on, embracing the doubt that was introduced or give it all up. .....

I think there is an important 3rd choice, ..... dig deeper! Sometimes the problem is the translation or other times it is something that someone has inserted, at least in that translation, etc.
I never met anyone that I could not learn something from.
User avatar
Bare_Truth
Native Resident
 
Posts: 2462
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 10:07 pm
Location: Ozark Plateau, Southwest Missouri

Re: I think he's another religion.

Postby Petros » Sat Jul 26, 2014 11:45 pm

The proverb deal is a red herring. Proverbs universally - all wisdom literature - present us with dozens of these apparent contrasts. Wisdom - particularly divine wisdom - is discernment, not cut and dried precepts. To quote one of my associated from High school 3, look before you leap, remembering that he who hesitates is lost. Both excellent advice; but in practice we need to grasp the nettle and determined WHICH the moment calls for.

It is important that taken as a whole, ignoring the predigested dogmas of this group or that, the scriptures give an internally consistent picture of a God who does not match well with most preconceptions and is quite incompatible with any other deity description I know.
The truth, the stark naked truth, the truth without so much as a loincloth on, should surely be the investigator's sole aim - Basil Chamberlain
User avatar
Petros
Native Resident
 
Posts: 5268
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 2:01 am
Location: Wisconsin

Re: I think he's another religion.

Postby bn2bnude » Sun Jul 27, 2014 9:10 am

natman wrote:
bn2bnude wrote:For instance, how do you reconcile these two verses in Proverbs:
Proverbs 26:4-5 wrote:4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.

5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.


To me, these "apparently" contradictory statements are saying that we should use wisdom and discernment when dealing with foolish people. We should not respond to them in kind, using the same "foolish" reasoning that they do. But (if directed by the Holy Spirit), respond to them taking into account their foolishness.

bn2bnude wrote:When you start seeing all the places in the Bible that the story being told doesn't match the beliefs your are told to be certain about (and yes, there are plenty) you have two choices -- continue on, embracing the doubt that was introduced or give it all up.


Can you give us some further examples (since, as you say, "there are plenty")?



Bare_Truth wrote:
bn2bnude wrote:For instance, how do you reconcile these two verses in Proverbs:
Proverbs 26:4-5 wrote:4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.
5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.

I should think that would be obvious, that the way to deal with someone who is being foolish is situational and often dependent on the nature of the foolish one, and also if there is an audience he/she is playing to , etc.


Petros wrote:The proverb deal is a red herring. Proverbs universally - all wisdom literature - present us with dozens of these apparent contrasts....


So, what you've proved to me is you are not "wooden readers of the BIble". I have friends, however, who look at "Train up a child..." and are crushed when their child does not follow in their faith.

What about Ehrman. If you look at the attached link, I am not sure how he looked at scripture. I do believe, however, that someone knocked out one of the "cards" in his belief system and it all came crashing down.

Nathan, Petros & Bare_Truth, I've been around you long enough to have respect for the ways you dissect and interpret Scripture. Nathan especially is one who does "the right things" when it comes to looking at genre, who it was written to and from. That said, I know there are issues we disagree on (which I am not going to address here). Just let me say that I don't think you are in danger of a house of cards faith as, I believe, Ehrman was.

One of my first cognitive dissonance was, coming from a dispensational belief system, was seeing all sorts of instances of grace extended to Israel. My reaction was to walk away from dispensationalism. Let me list, however, some things I am still dealing with...

1) Why, if God is a God of love, does he practice genocide throughout the Old Testament?
2) With regards to election/predestination, how is it loving for God to pick a fraction of the population, largely dictated by where I am fortunate enough to have been raised, to go to "heaven" and the rest to go to "hell" (whatever hell is).
3) Does God change? Does God change his mind? -- How many times does God tell Moses he is going to annihilate Israel (I can think of at least 2) and start over -- then does not do that.
4) Why did God send the prophet to Hezakiah with a proclamation that "You are going to die tonight" (not conditional) then end up giving him 15 more years of life?

Again, my issues are not necessarily with Scripture itself (as you all have shown, there are ways to interpret the odd things that don't destroy faith). My issues are with the teaching that goes along with that... For instance, I frequently heard "Don't answer a fool" but don't ever remember hearing "Answer a fool" except in the Bible.
So now there is no condemnation for those who belong to Christ Jesus. (Rom 8:1 NLT)



If I speak with the tongues of men and angels but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. (1 Cor 13:1)
User avatar
bn2bnude
Native Resident
 
Posts: 2712
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 8:09 am
Location: Denver

Re: I think he's another religion.

Postby Ramblinman » Sun Jul 27, 2014 2:40 pm

bn2bnude wrote:...Again, my issues are not necessarily with Scripture itself (as you all have shown, there are ways to interpret the odd things that don't destroy faith). My issues are with the teaching that goes along with that... For instance, I frequently heard "Don't answer a fool" but don't ever remember hearing "Answer a fool" except in the Bible.

The paradoxical statement is central to Hebrew thought.
It shows the limitations of expressing eternal truth in human language, but also teaches truth if you use the whole counsel of God's word. Two apparently contradictory statements each contain elements of an important truth, but are incomplete without the other statement.

That people take one statement and run with it to the exclusion of the other statement(s) is all too common. We call it eisegesis as you probably know. I've seen it for years and I still get annoyed when people do it.
Ramblinman
Native Resident
 
Posts: 2628
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:22 am
Location: United States

Re: I think he's another religion.

Postby bn2bnude » Sun Jul 27, 2014 8:24 pm

Ramblinman wrote:
bn2bnude wrote:...Again, my issues are not necessarily with Scripture itself (as you all have shown, there are ways to interpret the odd things that don't destroy faith). My issues are with the teaching that goes along with that... For instance, I frequently heard "Don't answer a fool" but don't ever remember hearing "Answer a fool" except in the Bible.

The paradoxical statement is central to Hebrew thought.
It shows the limitations of expressing eternal truth in human language, but also teaches truth if you use the whole counsel of God's word. Two apparently contradictory statements each contain elements of an important truth, but are incomplete without the other statement.

That people take one statement and run with it to the exclusion of the other statement(s) is all too common. We call it eisegesis as you probably know. I've seen it for years and I still get annoyed when people do it.

:like:
So now there is no condemnation for those who belong to Christ Jesus. (Rom 8:1 NLT)



If I speak with the tongues of men and angels but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. (1 Cor 13:1)
User avatar
bn2bnude
Native Resident
 
Posts: 2712
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 8:09 am
Location: Denver

Re: I think he's another religion.

Postby Petros » Mon Jul 28, 2014 12:36 am

Passing lightly over other issues that are equally but differently puzzling, the order to eliminate the Canaanites, from the one who said "thou shalt not kill", is yes a tad problematic. Forget "it just means don't murder" - God is not generally much of a quibbler, we are the ones who declare that duck = fish and that hiring a gentile to do chores does not violate the sabbath. One can get hung up on such issues.

I think it is important to remember, first, that as we are repeatedly told in scripture and see in our daily experience, God is not / cannot be comprehensible. We can try - write all kinds of analyses and fictional dogmata - but we are just filling the bookshelves. Remember Many Moons > http://manymoons1.wordpress.com < ? I do not generally care for Thurber, but there is truth in that, and the Little Child gets further with both the moon and God than the Big Guns.

Most of what God does he does not even try to explain or justify - what he says and does is nonsense to us but perfect sense to him. I read just this morning this hassidic story - not quite the Jewish equivalent of the Desert Fathers but not that fat either:

"Rabbi Israel Baal Shem Tov (1698-1760), the founder of the Chassidic movement, was once asked: "Why is it that Chassidim burst into song and dance at the slightest provocation? Is this the behavior of a healthy, sane individual?"

The Baal Shem Tov responded with a story:

Once, a musician came to town -- a musician of great but unknown talent. He stood on a street corner and began to play.

Those who stopped to listen could not tear themselves away, and soon a large crowd stood enthralled by the glorious music whose equal they had never heard. Before long they were moving to its rhythm, and the entire street was transformed into a dancing mass of humanity.

A deaf man walking by wondered: Has the world gone mad? Why are the townspeople jumping up and down, waving their arms and turning in circles in middle of the street?

"Chassidim," concluded the Baal Shem Tov, "are moved by the melody that issues forth from every creature in G-d's creation. If this makes them appear mad to those with less sensitive ears, should they therefore cease to dance?"

Expanding - much of what God does is incredible music inaudible to us so the world seems nuts.

Second point - whatever else it is [and it is] much of scripture is and is structured as folklore [the relation between folklore and history is quite complex]. And much of the panhuman folktale is structured around the GEAS - a prohibition that the audience and the pronouncer of the GEAS KNOW is going to be violated. Start off with a bang in the garden, LEAVE THAT THREE ALONE, first geasin the Bible and biggest geas in JudeoChristian lore.

"Kill Canaanites" gets at least two geas violations: the guys loot instead of destroying Canaanite property, and they get tricked into a treaty with Gibeon. God as omniscient narrator knows - and we as experienced consumers of human folklore know - that the geas will be violated,. And the narrator sets it up, it being part of the story and its message. God speaks to us in human language, the language he has programmed us to use - and the geas is part of the syntax.

Part of the lesson is, we cannot keep the law, cannot help sinning. And another part is, we cannot even sin efficiently.

I would love to understand it all. But I have grown enough I don't knock my head on the brick wall when I can't see through it, and I am content to know in part for now.
The truth, the stark naked truth, the truth without so much as a loincloth on, should surely be the investigator's sole aim - Basil Chamberlain
User avatar
Petros
Native Resident
 
Posts: 5268
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 2:01 am
Location: Wisconsin

Re: I think he's another religion.

Postby bn2bnude » Mon Jul 28, 2014 8:36 am

Remember, although I'm asking questions, its also a matter of Ehrman, the original topic of the strip, who likely also went through them and more.

We tend to think our faith, our Bible (and reasoning) are so straight forward but to someone out in the world.. It doesn't really make too much sense. Oddly enough it takes faith and we approach it as gnostics.
So now there is no condemnation for those who belong to Christ Jesus. (Rom 8:1 NLT)



If I speak with the tongues of men and angels but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. (1 Cor 13:1)
User avatar
bn2bnude
Native Resident
 
Posts: 2712
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 8:09 am
Location: Denver

Re: I think he's another religion.

Postby Ramblinman » Mon Jul 28, 2014 11:13 am

Petros wrote:Passing lightly over other issues that are equally but differently puzzling, the order to eliminate the Canaanites, from the one who said "thou shalt not kill", is yes a tad problematic. Forget "it just means don't murder" - God is not generally much of a quibbler, we are the ones who declare that duck = fish and that hiring a gentile to do chores does not violate the sabbath. One can get hung up on such issues.

Keep in mind that God did NOT authorize the killing of the Canaanites until they had reached a point of no return.
In the fourth generation your descendants will come back here, for the sin of the Amorites has not yet reached its full measure." Genesis 15:16

Also note that God sets time limits:
... And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also
is flesh: yet his days shall be a hundred and twenty years. ... Genesis 6:3

Not all gentiles are Canaanites, and even the Canaanites have not always been judged prime for execution.

In Abraham's day, Melchizedek was a high priest of the same God that Abraham worshiped. The Canaanites were once a righteous people, at least in part.

The devil is in the details. There is NOT a universal mandate to take up the sword against infidels.
Ramblinman
Native Resident
 
Posts: 2628
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:22 am
Location: United States

Re: I think he's another religion.

Postby natman » Mon Jul 28, 2014 3:52 pm

bn2bnude wrote:Let me list, however, some things I am still dealing with...

1) Why, if God is a God of love, does he practice genocide throughout the Old Testament?


Some of the things that is hardest for humans to grasp are the concepts of God's "TOTAL sovereignty" and "unmerited grace".

People do not tend to have a problem with God's "sovereignty" until it impinges upon their "personal" ability to choose Him or not. They tend to believe that they "deserve" to be save based upon their OWN action of CHOOSING to believe that Jesus is the Christ, their Lord and their Savior. However, I think that the Bible paints God differently. Repeatedly, we are told that God will have mercy upon whom He will have mercy, will give grace to whom He will give grace and will harden whom He will harden.

I have something I call "The 10,000 foot view of Scripture". I believe that when we stand back and look at the entirety of Scripture, we see one thread throughout, from Genesis to Revelation. That thread is of a God Who is doing what it takes to create a people for Himself who will freely and joyfully love Him for all eternity. He does this by creating ALL people with a free will to choose or not to choose, but also by granting a measure of grace to some that opens their eyes to the Truth of the Gospel, lest NO ONE would choose Him. The rest are used of God for the purpose of testing, forming and strengthening those whom He has poured His extra grace.

We are not appalled when a potter creates some vessels for the purpose of blending, shaping and strengthening other vessels made of the same clay to be fine china, and then destroying or repurposing the utility vessels. Paul likens some people whom God has created to fine china and some as utility vessels. They are ALL His creation and they are ALL used according to His good purpose, for His own glory and to His own end.

bn2bnude wrote:2) With regards to election/predestination, how is it loving for God to pick a fraction of the population, largely dictated by where I am fortunate enough to have been raised, to go to "heaven" and the rest to go to "hell" (whatever hell is).


I do not think that it has much to do with WHERE you were fortunate enough to have been raised or even the family or faith in which you were raised. Remember that God chose Abraham out of an ungodly people, even out of a family of idol makers, to be the father of many nations. Based on some accounts I have read, there are STILL people who come to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ, even Muslims, through dreams and visions.

The net result of God's work through grace and mercy is that everyone ends up where they want to be according to their own desires. The only difference is that some of those desires have been shaped because of the gracious (undeserved) indwelling of the Holy Spirit. The question is not, "Why doesn't God save EVERYONE?", but rather, "Why does God save ANYONE?". He doesn't have to. He would be totally just if He did nothing and let EVERYONE perish according to their own "natural" decisions and actions.

bn2bnude wrote:3) Does God change? Does God change his mind? -- How many times does God tell Moses he is going to annihilate Israel (I can think of at least 2) and start over -- then does not do that.


Since the Bible is inspired by God but written by men, from man's perspective, I suspect that it only "appears" that God has changed His mind. However, we know from other Scriptural verses that God is omniscient, knowing the beginning and the end. Rather than changing His mind, God is using His words and actions to change the hearts and minds of those whom He is shaping for His purpose. Also, when it appears that He is starting over, we see that He is not starting over COMPLETELY. There is ALWAYS a remnant of the work He has accomplished up to that point.

bn2bnude wrote:4) Why did God send the prophet to Hezakiah with a proclamation that "You are going to die tonight" (not conditional) then end up giving him 15 more years of life?


At the 10,000 foot level, I see this as a way for God to show that He does indeed listen to our prayers and has the power to change the paths of our lives if we would by pray to Him. This event could have gone unrecorded if not for the fact that God had inspired someone to write down the prophecies of Isaiah, which prophesies changed the direction of the nation of Israel, ultimately leading to the fulfillment of earlier prophesies, the restoration of the nation and the birth and life of the Messiah.

bn2bnude wrote:My issues are with the teaching that goes along with that... For instance, I frequently heard "Don't answer a fool" but don't ever remember hearing "Answer a fool" except in the Bible.


That is why it is so important that we read, study and meditate on Scripture. I think that it was out of laziness of the general people and a desire of a very few to rule over others that the Roman Catholic Church fell so deeply into corruption that it fostered the need for the Reformation, which was not intended to do away with the Roman Catholic Church, but to draw it back to it's roots. I too get frustrated with the "Church" not teaching the Truth, the WHOLE Truth and NOTHING BUT the Truth. The problem is that it appears that there is not a single denomination that does so. Every one that I have examined have some pet area that they seem to fudge on a little, or a lot. Just find one where you fit best into so that you can perform the Great Commission to the best of your abilities and talents.
SON-cerely,
Nathan Powers

Get exposed to the sun, and get exposed to the Son.
User avatar
natman
Mayor (Site Admin)
 
Posts: 7257
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 3:48 pm
Location: Houston, Texas

Re: I think he's another religion.

Postby Petros » Tue Jul 29, 2014 12:58 am

bn2bnude - no, I am not forgetting Ehrman. He has to be one of the types programmed [like my brother] to seek certainty rather than truth, and to look for it in the mouths and position papers of gurus.

If he grew up imprinted on house-of cards Christianity [as many do, I think that is how atheism entered our family through my grandfather responding to a bible thumping mother] and then entered a deprogramming environment in higher education, he would almost inevitably shed A and reject with the bathwater anything sharing the Christian label.

Happens a LOT.
The truth, the stark naked truth, the truth without so much as a loincloth on, should surely be the investigator's sole aim - Basil Chamberlain
User avatar
Petros
Native Resident
 
Posts: 5268
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 2:01 am
Location: Wisconsin

Re: I think he's another religion.

Postby bn2bnude » Tue Jul 29, 2014 8:08 am

Petros wrote:bn2bnude - no, I am not forgetting Ehrman. He has to be one of the types programmed [like my brother] to seek certainty rather than truth, and to look for it in the mouths and position papers of gurus.

If he grew up imprinted on house-of cards Christianity [as many do, I think that is how atheism entered our family through my grandfather responding to a bible thumping mother] and then entered a deprogramming environment in higher education, he would almost inevitably shed A and reject with the bathwater anything sharing the Christian label.

Happens a LOT.

As such, it's easy to disagree with him but hard not to pity him. That said, it seems like he could be a product of our own making.
So now there is no condemnation for those who belong to Christ Jesus. (Rom 8:1 NLT)



If I speak with the tongues of men and angels but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. (1 Cor 13:1)
User avatar
bn2bnude
Native Resident
 
Posts: 2712
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 8:09 am
Location: Denver

Re: I think he's another religion.

Postby Petros » Tue Jul 29, 2014 3:51 pm

The ones who are that abrasively vocal, I suspect, have a niggling doubt under the certainty.

Ehrman or my brother, prayer being what it is, may ripen and "fall" off their tree any time.
The truth, the stark naked truth, the truth without so much as a loincloth on, should surely be the investigator's sole aim - Basil Chamberlain
User avatar
Petros
Native Resident
 
Posts: 5268
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 2:01 am
Location: Wisconsin

Re: I think he's another religion.

Postby bn2bnude » Wed Aug 13, 2014 9:45 pm

I ran across this on Facebook...
At a recent "Freedom From Religion Foundation" conference, a crowd of atheists/agnostics, Bart Ehrman (himself an atheist/agnostic) was a keynote speaker. At the end of his talk, a fellow blurted out:

"I do not see evidence in archeology or history for the historical Jesus."

And Ehrman responded:

"Yeah, well, I do. I have a whole book on it. There is a lot of evidence. I mean, there is so much evidence that it is not... I know that in the crowds you all run around with it is commonly thought that Jesus did not exist. But let me tell you, once you get outside of your conclave, there's nobody who thinks this. This is not even an issue for scholars of antiquity. It is not an issue. There is no scholar in any college or university in the western world who teaches classics, ancient history, New Testament, early Christianity, or any related field, who doubts that Jesus existed.

I think that atheists have done themselves a disservice by jumping on the bandwagon of mythicism, because frankly it makes you look foolish to the outside world. If that's what you're going to believe, you just look foolish. You are much better off going with historical evidence and arguing historically rather than coming up with the theory that Jesus didn't exist."
So now there is no condemnation for those who belong to Christ Jesus. (Rom 8:1 NLT)



If I speak with the tongues of men and angels but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. (1 Cor 13:1)
User avatar
bn2bnude
Native Resident
 
Posts: 2712
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 8:09 am
Location: Denver

Re: I think he's another religion.

Postby Petros » Thu Aug 14, 2014 12:44 am

Which is very much something. Like my brother, he will not go that far. it is quite enough, and simple enough, to discount the accumulated lore. To see no evidence for virgin birth, resurrection, divinity, to see echoes of Tammuz and Mithras, it is not necessary to maintain nobody was ever there.

I do not care for his style and have problem with his content, he would not care for mine, but I gladly give him credit for that effort to make some see sense.
The truth, the stark naked truth, the truth without so much as a loincloth on, should surely be the investigator's sole aim - Basil Chamberlain
User avatar
Petros
Native Resident
 
Posts: 5268
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 2:01 am
Location: Wisconsin

PreviousNext

Return to Christianity and other religions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron