Time to face up to the truth of religion?

[Ridgewalk]

Can we please separate 'religion' from being 'spiritual.'

 

The first causes division, the other brings them together.

 

What's the difference it's all false consciousness. I know because Karl Marx told me, personally, in my more ethereal moments

 

---------- Post added 13-12-2016 at 00:50 ----------

 

I suppose Socialism, the human faith, is kind of spiritual

[Anna B]

I'm not sure what historical fact you are referring to when you say that people who knew him were prepared to die for him.

 

As has already been stated, there are no contemporary records of Jesus at all- all writing about him dates from after his death. How can it therefore be historical fact that people who knew him were willing to die for him. At best, those 'facts' must just be stories about him from after he died..

 

If not a man, around whom is the Christian religion based?

 

The early martyrs, including some of the disciples died in his name. Persecution started almost at once. It's a fair bet that they heard him speak.

[andyofborg]

If not a man, around whom is the Christian religion based?

 

paul the apostle

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauline_Christianity

[Robin-H]

If not a man, around whom is the Christian religion based?

 

The early martyrs, including some of the disciples died in his name. Persecution started almost at once. It's a fair bet that they heard him speak.

 

According to what? Claiming that the bible is a source of 'historical facts' won't do. There will be some true elements to the bible but it would be obviously incorrect to extrapolate that to suggest that everything is true (as there are many many things in the bible that are demonstrably not true).

 

Are there other sources (written at the time) that say that disciples of Jesus, who heard him speak, died for him?

 

I know that early martyrs died in his name - I don't believe that anyone is disputing that - but that's not what you originally said.

[Anna B]

According to what? Claiming that the bible is a source of 'historical facts' won't do. There will be some true elements to the bible but it would be obviously incorrect to extrapolate that to suggest that everything is true (as there are many many things in the bible that are demonstrably not true).

 

Are there other sources (written at the time) that say that disciples of Jesus, who heard him speak, died for him?

 

I know that early martyrs died in his name - I don't believe that anyone is disputing that - but that's not what you originally said.

 

Actually, I don't really care. Of course the Bible isn't all true, particularly the old Testament. For a start it's a collection of separate books written by different people at different times, and much has been left out of it, (Gospel of Mary Magdalene for example.) It's been translated (often and badly) into different languages and interpreted for different cultures. Plenty of room there for mistakes.

 

I believe, though I'm not sure, that the New testament was a collection of actual testimonies, documents and letters (letters of Paul for example,) regarding the founding of the Christian church and its teachings. So different sources have been deliberately gathered together and put in one place by Emperor Constantine at the conference of Nicaea in around 300AD.

 

Jesus' ministry was surprisingly short (probably less than 3 years) and eventful, so it's unlikely a great deal was written during his life time, and much less that it has survived, although stories may have been passed down by word of mouth. Many biographies are written after the subject dies and often after a period of reflection.

 

It is thought by some scholars that there was a schism in the approach to founding the fledgling church, between the bothers of Jesus; James and Simon, who thought the teachings of Jesus the man, were the most important aspect of is ministry, and some of the disciples, particularly Andrew and John who thought the church should become a personality cult of Jesus, and may have introduced the supernatural elements. There is also a lot of speculation about the role of Mary Magdalene who may have been Jesus' wife, and in whom he entrusted the future of his teachings because she 'got' it, but who was frozen out by the others.

 

How the scholars came to these conclusions I have no idea, it's just what I've read. I find it interesting, but however it came about doesn't diminish the main message for me.

That we should love each other, love God, have faith and forgive.

Edited December 13, 2016 by Anna B

[Obelix]

I can show you a butterfly and a caterpillar ...... Well designed

 

Not really. They were never designed.

 

Evolved yes.

 

---------- Post added 13-12-2016 at 00:54 ----------

 

Actually, I don't really care. Of course the Bible isn't all true, particularly the old Testament.

 

I thought it was meant to be inerrant.....? So you pick and choose the inconvenuent bits.

[Anna B]

Not really. They were never designed.

 

Evolved yes.

 

---------- Post added 13-12-2016 at 00:54 ----------

 

 

I thought it was meant to be inerrant.....? So you pick and choose the inconvenuent bits.

 

The inerrancy of the Bible is much disputed by Theologians themselves. It may have been inspired by God but is given to much interpretation, mistakes, fallibillity and **** ups. It all depends on one's individual experience of God, so yes, I do feel I can take from it as much or as little as i want.

 

Much better to go to the head man himself and see what he says.

Edited December 13, 2016 by Anna B

[WestTinsley]

That's a very good question. What do you think?

 

Could it possibly be that he was very special indeed, miracles or no miracles?

 

People who knew him were prepared to die for him, and that's a historical fact. And his teachings survive 2,000 years later, a bit longer i suspect, than your economics teacher. Yet you say Jesus of Nazareth never even existed....

Im not anti religions .. but when it comes to affirming atheism for me, reading or hearing religious rhetoric tends to help.

 

N.B. As for the bible and in particular the old Testament it derives from the original Greek of the Septuagint..

http://theorthodoxchurch.info/blog/ocrc/2009/06/the-orthodox-bible/

[Cyclone]

See post#100 for statistics.

 

---------- Post added 12-12-2016 at 18:01 ----------

 

Checked it.

 

You appear to have confused the UK with the entire world.

Christianity is not the most common religion in the world.

If you mean in the UK then you have to say so.

 

---------- Post added 13-12-2016 at 07:40 ----------

 

The inerrancy of the Bible is much disputed by Theologians themselves. It may have been inspired by God but is given to much interpretation, mistakes, fallibillity and **** ups. It all depends on one's individual experience of God, so yes, I do feel I can take from it as much or as little as i want.

 

Much better to go to the head man himself and see what he says.

 

Or, more likely, it was simply made up by men. In the 4th century wasn't it?

 

"The head man". Well, I'm sure that if he were to actually speak then every scientist and non believer, and all those other religions who must have got it wrong (you know, the ones that are more popular than Christianity) would immediately change their views.

I would, all he has to do is appear as a giant face in the sky, or a floating apparition over all of Sheffield and that's it, I'll start to believe.

Whilst ever the 'evidence' is instead a single work of fiction and the word of minority of apparently delusional people, I'll stick with the non belief.

I'll also continue to not believe in the other Abrahamic religions, Hinduism, Shintoism, Buddhism, Confucianism, Jediism, Paganism, Satanism, Olympic gods, Greek gods, and so on.

[Obelix]

The inerrancy of the Bible is much disputed by Theologians themselves. It may have been inspired by God but is given to much interpretation, mistakes, fallibillity and **** ups. It all depends on one's individual experience of God, so yes, I do feel I can take from it as much or as little as i want.

 

Much better to go to the head man himself and see what he says.

 

You see thats one thing about science - you dont cherry pick your evidence you have to account for everything. Much less prone to error.

 

But this head man then - who is he? I mean theres YWHW, or Jesus, or Mohammed, I mean one guys got three religions all of who claim different things... and then there are some people following Shiva and Vishnu, and they have their own ideas...

 

Does this guy have a phone number, or an email that he answers?