18 Mar 08
Originally posted by FreakyKBHIt is because I have asked these questions -- who was the author and who was the audience --
Funny stuff. Only from an arrogant mind can come questions so heavily loaded as these. Who wrote the piece? Who was the intended audience? Such questions never burden the arrogant mind: they are more content in their insistence that a first century author sound exactly like a 21st century investigative reporter. Keep dreamin', bro.
that I am comfortable with the contradictions. That is, I don't insist that the Gospels (e.g.) are
free of errors and contradictions, because I know that the authors were only shaping the stories
(as all authors do) to suit their particular hermeneutic -- their and their audiences beliefs and
interests.
Why do you think I read the NAB more frequently than any other English translation? Because the
footnotes call especial attention to such instances as these, and the authors of those footnotes are
unashamed to say things like 'St Matthew misunderstood the prophecy.'
Nemesio
19 Mar 08
Originally posted by Bosse de NageEverything in the Bible is disputed, even by its followers. And what do you mean by 'the modern view'? If it is still 'disputed' then there must be some modern people who dispute it.
The original language of the gospels is disputed:
Your conclusion here is bunkum.
I made no conclusion. I merely said there were implications. I do think that anyone who claims that any one of the Gospels was written by a witness is doing so solely on personal desire and not on reasonable evidence.
But probably they were written by people relying on oral tradition. They agree as to the essentials.
Naturally, they agree on the essentials or they would not have been included in the Bible. The gospels that did not agree were left out. Also they copied from each other.
I think they were people relying on old testament prophesy - not oral tradition.
20 Mar 08
If the Bible...was made up....Gospels and pretty much the whole thing..... Why is Christianity so popular still today? 2000 years later? Was it made up that well? Can you make something that well with several different authors spanning several different centuries?
Not that you should necessarily determine the truth of something by how long it survives but why has it survived so long if it was made up?
How many fads come and go? Why has Christianity stayed around?
How many other cults, religions, ways of thinking, have stayed as long and as big as Christianity?
20 Mar 08
Originally posted by eagleeye222001For rulers, religion was an instrument to control and unify the masses. You can explain the spread of Christianity with the roman empire and its historical context. The oppression of the middle ages helped to root it in europe. People are weak and afraid, and will follow anything that gives them an answer or hope.
If the Bible...was made up....Gospels and pretty much the whole thing..... Why is Christianity so popular still today? 2000 years later? Was it made up that well? Can you make something that well with several different authors spanning several different centuries?
Not that you should necessarily determine the truth of something by how long it s ...[text shortened]... w many other cults, religions, ways of thinking, have stayed as long and as big as Christianity?
According to the argument you used, you could also be an hindu, muslim or buddhist. Why has hinduism survived a lot longer then christianity? Why is Islam expanding a lot faster then any other religion?
Why has christianity divided into so many different cults? It surely doesn't reach consensus, even among believers.
I know why, do you want to wake up and see it too?
20 Mar 08
Originally posted by serigadoFor starters...the Roman Empire did not look upon Christianity with any favor at all until 300 AD or so. Christianity spread quickly before that.
For rulers, religion was an instrument to control and unify the masses. You can explain the spread of Christianity with the roman empire and its historical context. The oppression of the middle ages helped to root it in europe. People are weak and afraid, and will follow anything that gives them an answer or hope.
According to the argument you used, you c ...[text shortened]... 't reach consensus, even among believers.
I know why, do you want to wake up and see it too?
Hinduism started before Christianity. Like 5000 BC. as opposed to 1 AD.
According to http://www.religionfacts.com/
Christianity still beats out aevery other religion although I am not sure how good those numbers are. I will look at a few more sites.
Christianity has divided into so many different denominations because of people like to tailor their beliefs to suit their own desires and convenience.
When Christianity first started, it was Roman Catholic.
Wake up and see what? Why would I want to convince myself that there is no God? So then I am not responsible for anything?
20 Mar 08
Originally posted by eagleeye222001I don't need to convince yourself of nothing. You did a good job convincing yourself the christian god is the way to go. Believing god is actually the way to take away responsibilities from yourself. Taking matter into your own hands is taking responsibility for everything, so I don't quite understand your comment.
For starters...the Roman Empire did not look upon Christianity with any favor at all until 300 AD or so. Christianity spread quickly before that.
Hinduism started before Christianity. Like 5000 BC. as opposed to 1 AD.
According to http://www.religionfacts.com/
Christianity still beats out aevery other religion although I am not sure how good ...[text shortened]... ould I want to convince myself that there is no God? So then I am not responsible for anything?
You have the greater, biggest and better religion. I'm surely not the one to tell you otherwise. 1 billion people can't be wrong, right?