There is a new book that seem sto argue that Jesus was a historical figure, but that's he was just a regular dude. Of course this covers soem of the stuff Steve mentions all the time so I thought I'd send to another blog that basically destroys this. Seems Christians started their persecution complex a long time ago! Who knew?!?!
Also, some stuff about Evil and whatnot. And Steve wonders why I don't take philosophy seriously. Gah!
Also, found this little gem: Excusing God's absence!
Let the fire, brimstone and illogical thinking begin!
Best!
Brett
19 comments:
Great articles,enjoyable reads. Unfortunately most religious folks will have their "faith shield" in the upright, locked and ready position to handily deflect all those vicious little Logic, reason and common sense bullets.
Okay Chris thank you for your input. I'm a little hesitant to engage Brett on this because historically what happens is I tend to stick to logic and reason as a rational basis for understanding and Brett seems to misunderstand that science is utterly dependent upon operating under this larger umbrella of reason.
Reason is how we process, weigh, and test ideas; even if it is empirical or a physical science it is carried out within the guide lines of reason. If you don't trust reason or believe in reason it is pointless to discuss anything. Are you tracking with that? Do you understand how reason works? Reason does not discount supernatural possibilities, instead it tests for them without giving preference to a naturalistic world view. Brett, and to a lesser degree, you Chris, kind of miss this point; materialism is always given preferential treatment and ultimate trump status. That is not in lines with an argument based on reason. No priori is accepted except for believing we live in a reasonable universe and there are laws which govern reality. That is why it is kind of a silly little thing we do here. I build a case on reason, which exists above naturalism, and Brett throws out some naturalistic world view data not realizing it fails because it hasn't engaged the argument at the proper depth.
I'm also not always sure Brett actually reads the whole articles he links to, it almost a case of citation bluffing; just hoping the existence of a counter argument is enough to carry the debate. We've covered a lot of these article's material before, so I'm curious if there is a particular detail which actually had intellectual or academic weight to it which you found compelling?
I'm probably a cynic but I realize every Easter season some enterprising publisher repackages the same old tropes with a new cover and hopes shock value will provide sales.
so I'm curious if there is a particular detail which actually had intellectual or academic weight to it which you found compelling?
Ya, I loved the(and I'm paraphrasing here)part in mistake 3 where he asks if everyone is really supposed to swallow that in the midst of huge trend for virgin born, dying, resurrected, sin abolishing etc. pagan gods; along with the Jewish beliefs of sacrifices atoning for the sins of an entire nation and the Holy spirit making Jewish kings into "sons of god." Christianity came up with it's tenets all by themselves, completely independent of outside influence. He points out that this is Religious syncretism and is how all religions are born.
I love mistake 4 as well and bonus Steve, it covers the statement you have made several times here. I'm paraphrasing again but in essence; the Jews were expecting a powerful military messiah who would crush their oppressors, free the Jews and create an earthly kingdom. While Carrier admits this was a popular belief, you simply cannot say that all the different sects of Jews held this belief.
Carrier goes on to state that not only is there precedence for a dying messiah (Daniel 9:26, the Melchizedek scroll and Jews taught and believed in a future messiah “son of Joseph” who would be killed by his enemies (as attested in the Talmud and other Judaica) but that Jesus is EXACTLY the kind of messiah the Jewish people would CREATE. One that was under the radar, one who was whispered and rumored about but never quite seen. One who couldn't be discredited for failing miserably to lead a military coup against the enemies of the Jewish nation and setting up an earthly kingdom.
Lastly(and my favorite)Carrier doesn't arrogantly claim the ultimate disapproval of a historical Jesus, but instead humbly admits that while there is still "evidence to debate and logic to test" his arguments should be sufficient and compelling enough to be "at least a respectable theory to consider."
Steve,
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA! OH man! That was TOO funny!
Nope logic does not discount the supernatural, but since nothing supernatural has EVER been found, then a NATURAL reason is and should be give precedence over something that has no evidence to support it. That logic, the one that science operates on, with evidence and not assuming that something that can't be explained now MUST mean it's supernatural is how logic and reason works. We dont miss this point. Supernatural occurrences have NEVER produced evidence for themselves. So at what point should we stop wasting time with them? OR do we keep doing it and getting no evidence just to appease the religious? Seems like a giant waste of time and money.
Is it EVEN REMOTELY logical and reasonable to worship a being that punishes us for thing we didn't do or have any control of? It it logical to worship a being that routinely kills us if we don't do what he says? Sorry Steve, you don't hold a grudge for thousands of years against your kids for eating something you tell them not to. Why are you morally superior to the most perfect thing in the universe. LOGIC and REASON would say then it's not perfect but again that and common sense escape you.
Steve, they have to hook line ans sinker...
Best,
Brett
And before you get all holier than thou Steve. I just took this Bible logic quiz and got 8 out of 10. See I am a 'True Christian' it even told me so 8 times!
http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news0203/biblelogicquiz.html
And yes I am joking, the questions are ridiculous. But damn is it funny!
Best,
Brett
Wooh Hoooo 9 outta 10 baby! I is a true God be damned Christian! Woot! Woot!
Brett for awhile there you were doing kinda okay. I think it was last week where you posted a pretty decent paraphrase of the message of the Bible; I didn’t do a good enough job of complementing you on that. That ain’t snark. You did have the basics down pretty good. To recap:
God is holy. Nothing unholy can exist in his presence. We sinned. We became unholy. We deserved death for our treason. (Even most nations still hold treason to be a capital offense-so even people understand why this deserves harsh punishment.) Rather than destroy us, God became man and was treated horribly and rejected by the Jewish people specifically and the rest of the world in general. Jesus was crucified, died and was buried. He rose again and offers all people the chance to follow Him. Jesus pays the price we should have. Christians no longer live a life based on performance to be accepted. But because we are accepted we love God and obey. All other religions say obey to get something-only Christianity flips the script and puts acceptance before obedience.
So I think we can all agree if God is real and he created everything, He does get to decide what the rules are. Also if He is Holy then anything unholy can’t enter into His presence or it would get zapped. Nothing illogical yet. Now Brett has already raised objections, but not based off of logic, only Brett’s opinion.
Brett asks,“Is it logical to worship a being that routinely kills us if we don't do what he says?” It is perfectly logical, it is how all the world works. Have you read a newspaper? Ever looked out a window? You’ve heard of the legal system, right? Do you constantly say all laws, police, jails, courts, etc. are unfair? Silly question, but that is how Brett’s mind seems to work-anything God does is stupid, but when people operate under the same moral code it makes perfect sense. Also Brett I’m not sure if you noticed, but neither me nor you is currently dead. Seriously, I just breathed on a mirror and yup-I still got breathe. So no, God has not killed you, and he doesn’t routinely kill people for not doing what He says-the vast majority of us get a second chance, a third chance, a fourth chance, a billionth chance, etc. We deserve death, but because of Grace we get an opportunity to repent and accept Christ. It sounds more like you don’t like being held accountable for your actions, that is one of the real underlying reasons people reject God. Brett you said even if God proved He was real and made perfect logical sense you would not worship him. Is that logical or based off of a desire to live independent of God?
Thanks Chris, you ask “Ya, I loved the(and I'm paraphrasing here)part in mistake 3 where he asks if everyone is really supposed to swallow that in the midst of huge trend for virgin born, dying, resurrected, sin abolishing etc. pagan gods; along with the Jewish beliefs of sacrifices atoning for the sins of an entire nation and the Holy spirit making Jewish kings into "sons of god." Christianity came up with it's tenets all by themselves, completely independent of outside influence. He points out that this is Religious syncretism and is how all religions are born.”
Kinda yes, but mostly no. Remember if you are going to try to discredit the Biblical account then you have to find either a better explanation for the historical facts and/or prove Christianity to be self contradictory. Your objections do have some merit (they are the right types of questions to be asking), but even if they were able to be substantiated (which they aren’t) they would only provide one other alternative way to order the Bible account-there would be no reason to give this alternative reading preference over the more traditional and better supported established understanding. It is possible given enough time to create an alternative take on every historical occurrence, but you must weigh the bulk of the evidence and recorded information. To be blunt Carrier’s take only works in the 21st Century playing a big game of “what if”-historically it is pure poppycock.
Christianity is based off of the Jewish system; the term “Christianity” was not widely used to describe Christ’s followers. The majority of the world considered Christians pagan, even atheists-because they rejected all gods but one. They had no classification for what the early Christian church was doing-so at the time, in that culture, Christians were vastly different than the other faiths. It was not seen as syncretism and it did not follow any conventional faith model-it was totally different. I think Carrier makes the same mistake you Chris tend to make, you don’t understand the ancient world. There was no internet, there was no vast media system, very few people could afford scrolls. Religion was a localized event which happened at Temples, Jewish or Pagan. People didn’t sit around reading and creating new religions-no Borders, No Barnes and Noble, No Amazion.com. That sounds silly, but you have to understand the culture. Information was by hearing and repeating. The point-you didn’t get whole new religions out of the blue, even if similar beliefs existed in other religions you would see an infusion or a gradual change. Good Jewish people did not radically change their beliefs over night. You also have to account for if the Jewish people were predisposed to accept Jesus, why didn’t they? Why did they want Him dead? Why did people want Jesus murdered before the crucifixion and follow Him afterwards? What made them change their mind. If I kill my enemy because I hate him, and he is dead, I’m not predisposed to suddenly think I made a mistake and worship a dead guy. It just makes no sense.
Then you say “to swallow that in the midst of huge trend for virgin born, dying, resurrected, sin abolishing etc. pagan gods; along with the Jewish beliefs of sacrifices atoning for the sins of an entire nation and the Holy spirit making Jewish kings into "sons of god."” All I can say to that Chris is BRING IT ON. You posted an incredibly silly list in the past which was so flimsily I couldn’t find enough scholarly evidence to even adequately study it. All I found was the same list repeated over and over and copied and pasted. It is somewhat similar to Bill Mahers Religious and Sam Harris’ claims of Christianity borrowing from pagan religions. Of course they list pagan gods which in no way actually were similar to Christianity and several instances of pagan myths which happened after Christ. Just shoddy scholarship. But Chris you are bright, if you can list an actual pagan religion which existed in the same location and predated Christianity with a virgin birth, death and resurrection story, Man becoming God, atonement-I would look into it. Huge trend-is a MAJOR misrepresentation. So no copying and pasting-no citation bluffing. Give me an actual belief system I could research.
I think I’ve only really touched on two of the areas you raised, and again thank you for taking the time to actually read the article.
If you think I'm blowing smoke let me know-I admit I'm shooting from the hip a bit here without getting out my history books, but if you are serious about these objections I can walk you through one by one each of the dates for the pagan belief systems.
And Brett, the Bible Quiz?
I've explained Christianity to you several times in a very consistent way. Even if you don't believe it, can you show me you actually listen and comprehend what I write?
What is the difference between Christianity and being able to acquire knowledge or give the right answer to a question. Can you accurately explain the difference between religion and Christianity?
death and resurrection story, Man becoming God,
I deleted it once and still reposted with the the same typo.
it should read "God becoming man"
sorry :)
Steve,
"if the Jewish people were predisposed to accept Jesus, why didn’t they? Why did they want Him dead? Why did people want Jesus murdered before the crucifixion and follow Him afterwards?"
"Good Jewish people did not radically change their beliefs over night."
It appears you are mistakenly lumping all of the Jews together in one big unified set of beliefs. Carrier states that the Jewish religion was made up of many different sects each having a varied set of beliefs, and it's quite logical to think that if the "Jesus model" messiah was already part of their lore that a portion of the Jewish faith would hold to that belief.
Further the bible clearly states that it was the Jewish elite, the priests and governing body that wanted Jesus dead. Why? Because like all men with power and influence the thing they feared to lose the most was their power and influence. The character of Jesus constantly and consistently pissed them off the most and makes for a great story. The Jesus model messiah would have had great appeal to the common folk, Jew and gentile alike because as you well know, it's an all inclusive, no frills, every mans religion. It makes perfect sense that over time(say about 20 years or so) because "Good Jewish people did not radically change their beliefs over night." that it would slowly spread and eventually take off like wildfire.
If you honestly look at the whole picture it fits very easily into a man-made cobbled together mythology.
On the point of syncretism, I think maybe you are the one who didn't read the whole article Steve. Fact mining a little eh? Carrier specifically states that a single religion with all of the attributes of Christianity is undeniably false, it didn't exist. What almost undoubtedly happened is that Christianity borrowed different aspects from religions in the surrounding regions that they would have been well aware of despite your claims of them being completely ignorant of what was going on around them. Christianity obviously didn't come out of a box Steve. Even today no one can agree and is why you have all the different Christian denominations. Christianity probably spread more like that game we all played as kids; you know the one where you all get in a circle and start out whispering something like "Joey likes to walk with Susie on the beach" to the person next to you and by the time it reaches the end it winds up being "Johny likes to fuck donkeys and sheep"
Things get lost in translation, people add to and take away from and by the time you get to Paul, the idea is a jumbled mess of multicultural stew. It's not a hard concept to grasp considering it still goes on today and the fact that we now realize that even first person eyewitness in most situations is VERY unreliable, much less 20 or 30 years after the fact.
And now that my eyes are crossing from being so tired and I've probably written an illegible mess up there, I'm done and am going to bed. I bid you all Adieu!
STEVE!
No need to recap. That's NOT logical. Doing something because everyone else does it is the exact opposite of logic. If god is real and he created everything (again no evidence to support this at all but I'll play along) then he can decide what the rules are… but we don't have to follow them, free will and all that. And this 'holy' thing? what is that EXACTLY? Because that's an ambiguous term. WE don't know he's holy, HE just says he is. Since he doesn't show himself or any of his angels to us anymore. Funny, how that seemed to happen after we started keeping better records...
And then you loose me and logic. That is NOT how the world works. Some laws work, others don't and they are changed forgot about or repealed. If someone killed every living thing on the planet and it wasn't god, how would you react? You'd hate and detest that thing, you would abor it. Yet when your god does it ,it's a good thing? WHAT?!?!?! You don't operate under the same code, which is what I've pointed out over and over again. You don't kill witches or unbelievers do you? Well god does, he also kills children and wants you to as well if they sass you. Morals have changed and evolved with societies, they do not stay the same and it's funny how other societies that had no interaction with your god have similar morals like apes and monkeys do.
No god has not killed me, this is beyond stupid Steve, but in your book he has killed everything on the planet with the exception of a few people and some animals (which there is no evidence for, there would be evidence in our DNA and the DNA on EVERYTHING on the planet if this were even remotely true. Genetic bottleneck.) So tell me how he's good again?
Wait we deserve death because some chick and her idiot boyfriend stole some fruit they weren't supposed to. DO YOU HEAR WHAT YOU ARE SAYING!!!!!! And again this makes your god worthy of worship and honor? Can you truly not see how some people might have a problem with this?
I would not worship him because he's a terrible, terrible person/thing. He took 2 'people' and basically torchared them because they didn't really understand what would happen to them if they ate a fruit. He caused all the war by destroying the Tower of Babel and making everyone speak a different language, he had the Hebrews kill men women and children, He killed EVERYTHING on the planet, even the things that had done nothing wrong because people were sinning and turning away from him. ASS! The he does this incredible stupid thing with a son that's not really a son when he can simply have an angel show up and say you know what, all is forgiven even though you all didn't do anything wrong, your ancestors did.
Then he doesn't STOP all the wars and shit his Churches start, I mean at what opine do you NOT stop and say you know what this guy is so NOT what I'm looking for in a fellow human let alone a deity I'm supposed to worship. Sorry man, NOT interested. Of course this is no evidence that supports ANY of this so it's a moot point. But I'M at least willing to attempt to see things from the other side, it's just that that other side is dirty and evil and morally corrupt. And we're supposed to be happy that he graces us with a chance to repent(!!!)
No Steve, see I AM held accountable for my actions, but I shouldn't be held accountable for OTHERS actions. I don't care if they were my father, brother or a thousand times removed grandfather. It's NOT fair, it's NOT moral and it's not human to be pushed for something I didn't do OR have ANY control over since I wasn't even born yet. SO my logic goes, why should I love something so horrible? Because some people have fallen for it's pitch doesn't mean I have to, do I think it's good? No. To me your god is a fricken evil thing, more akin to the Satan you like to claim is dancing around in hell than anything worthy of my time, let alone love and worship.
Steve, the quiz is a JOKE. It's simply made me laugh, and I'm pretty darn sure it's not real. Christianity is a type of religion. Since religion is basically a belief or worship of a deity then there is no difference. Christianity just specifies what deity it is.
But that's not what happens in your religion, god becomes partly man… and many even think it's just god on earth so he can interact with us. Which Zeus does all the time, how do you think he fathers all those kids? And Atonement? Heracles, one of Zeus kids. See the basics are already in the area, Mithra and a few others from Egyptian mythology as well.
Best,
Brett
To put in another way Steve, if something is bad you don't support it right? Well religion is bad so I don't support it. Simple logic.
Best,
Brett
Problem with long posts you can miss the forest for the trees.
Chris, I probably should have just stuck to the one central idea which sinks your whole argument, rather than also sinking all the little attached arguments.
Also I asked you to Bring It On, uhm.. can you Bring it? Even a little?
Okay, so here is the big fly in the ointment for you. EVEN if all these other religions had all the little lego pieces necessary to build Christianity (and again they don’t unless you only do the most superficial examination) why would it be a more credible explanation than the one supported by the recorded history of the church by Christians, Jews, and secular historians? It only works if you ignore the mountain of evidence for the Jewish race, the birth of the church, and the ancient world of Jesus’ day. It in no way fits archeology, and scholarly study. There is no reason to believe Carrier’s piecemeal approach to assembling facts. Sure there are sects and cults, there always will be; they can even have wildly different beliefs, but that doesn’t mean they were embraced. I have Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses within a block of my house, they exist, they have cultic beliefs, but they impact my faith not at all. You can read my Church’s history, you can read the history of the 16 different churches in my town and see it would be crazy to suggest they’ve been distorted in theology by the cults.
Brett you admit you are morally fallen. You admit to breaking multiple Brett moral laws even if you don’t accept Bible moral laws. And if the Bible is true you also have broken God’s laws as they are written, so even without Adam and Eve you admit by your own standards you fail. Correct? Seems you have a bigger problem with your logic than not liking the fact that most of the world has not shared your post Enlightenment Individualistic Egocentric world view.
Come on Steve, no one is ignoring the Jews or the rise of the church, and to say that the Christian faith is or was a stalwart, lone island completely unaffected by the world around it is rather naive.
It matters naught if you or your church are unaffected by the "cultish" practices of those around you, you and your church are not everyone.
If alternative religious ideas had zero impact on Christianity, you wouldn't have Mormons, Jehovahs' witnesses and all the other variations in the first place. It's still happening everywhere today Steve. Inevitably times and cultures change and you always have part of Christianity that tries to adapt and change with the times and a group that invariably remains old school.
I wouldn't be surprised at all, if in the next 10 years or so there is a mainstream splinter sect that is pro Homosexual and Women's rights.
You can ignore the reality around you and say it doesn't apply to you, but your not doing your self or others any favors
Steve,
First thing, your religion IS pulled from others, there is DIRECT evidence fort this in the flood account and Greek mythology, as Prometheus fashioned man from clay. The Name YWH was taken from ANOTHER religion as some jews migrated from areas to Jerusalem. The Jesus myth is pulled form Egyptian and Greek myths as well and some ancestor resurrection myths that are 12,000 years old. That you seem to think the bible is a historical document is a funny as it was in Galaxy Quest, until it became sad.
Ah, no Steve, I admit that humans are humans and will on occasion do things that others deem 'bad' . But for every one of us to be deemed bad before we even do something OR to be deemed bad for something we didn't do is ridiculous and childish. You assume that I have broken 'moral laws' but that's not even a real thing. There are no moral laws. There are laws. I don' t think fornication is a bad thing at all. In fact I think it's a great thing! so because YOU don't like it it's bad for me as well? DO you not see how twisted that logic is? Can you not see that it's not really logic but simply regurgitation of your religious ideas and not actual thought?
And don't think I didn't notice that you dodged/ignored ALL the questions about evidence fro the supernatural. Cause I still know, you got none!
Best,
Brett
Post a Comment