Forum for ex-members of Revival Churches
Revival_Centres_Discussion_Forums > Bible, Beliefs, Scriptures and 'The Word' > Didaktikon debunks Revivalist 'Theology' Go to subcategory:
Author Content
worriedmum
  • Rank:Regular Poster
  • Score:3440
  • Posts:142
  • From:Australia
  • Register:17/08/2007 9:04 PM

Date Posted:15/09/2007 2:03 PMCopy HTML

?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" />I am currently reading New Testament, as recommended by many including my own son.How do I understand this?Jesus did not let a man to bury his father. He said, "Follow me and let the dead bury their own dead." (Mathew 8.22) I reckon, it was not very nice, as he did not let the man to mourn over his fathers' dead body. What sort of phenomenological language is that? Should we all follow Christ then? A lot of people actually do so already in all sorts of Bible based cults.Is this what it means to be a true Christian?Then he drowned a herd of pigs, obviously including two possessed men. (M 8.32) If we follow the Christ, it looks like we should say goodbye to our already underfunded mental health care.Considering the other Jesus' miracles I do believe them in the same way as I believe in alien abduction.The worst part of the Bible I think is here. Jesus sends out the 12 apostles to drive out the evil spirits and to heal. Mathew 10.16. I am sending you out like sheep amongst wolves...10.21 Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. Everyone will hate you because of me...10.34. Do not suppose that I have come to bring piece to the earth. I did not come to bring piece but the sword."How I am supposed to understand this? Enforced Christianity? Or let's kill people for the common good? This is very disturbing evidence. Against the family values! This is a proclamation of a Crusade against humanity - "...whoever loses their life for my sake will find it" 10.39Amazingly, nothing actually said about how to heal people.I am sorry, but I am feeling stressed right now reading this and I have to stop.Too much analogy with Islam. I would very worried if I was a Muslim, I would be horrified! As I am scared being a free person.
If you attribute all your problems in life to God, and everything what you achieve in life to prayers, then you deprive yourself of a merit and deny yourself a chance of finding true causes of your problems and improving your present life and lives of the people around you. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Discover true Bible http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/inconsistencies.html
worriedmum Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #1
  • Rank:Regular Poster
  • Score:3440
  • Posts:142
  • From:Australia
  • Register:17/08/2007 9:04 PM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:30/09/2007 10:56 PMCopy HTML

After the first shock passed I went back to the Bible. No one dared to answer to my post and explain how we actually interpret that scripture. Even the omniscient Didaktikon. Yeah, why the Bible is so difficult to understand? May be because it uses Shakespeare's language. King James' version is not bad but today's new international version is better. Still people tend to interpret it the way they want it.

So let's keep reading.

Mathew 5.23 Jesus words are in red in that bible.

"Therefore if you are offering your gift at the altar..." I am pointing it out to you only because I m wondering what sort of gift Jesus talks about, because it is a truly pagan tradition to bring some offerings to an altar. And I hear from my son a lot about Catholicism and how it is build on pagan traditions that is why it is wrong. I don't agree with it, because the new testament is a continuation of the old testament and the old testament is not pagan, it is Jewish. So, it is a very strange teaching in RF. Can anyone comment anything for it, not against? Simply because I heard a lot against it, I want to hear something in support of Catholicism, if you care. I don't understand how Catholicism can be separated from Christianity because for more than thousand years this was the mainstream religion (together with Orthodox of course) and anyone who would think otherwise would be considered a heretic.

We went to Europe just this year and I loved those statues of different gods that were displayed in Paris museums, also in the Vatican museum. The god of love Eros, son of Aphrodite, the goddess of love, is holding his bow with arrow, any minute he is ready to shoot in our hearts, so we would fall in love. The goddess of hunt Artemis (Diana in Roman religion) has been always my favourite. "She loved hunting lions, panther, stag and deer, roaming the mountain forests and uncultivated land with her nymphs. Artemis was also a friend to mortals, dancing through the countryside in silver sandals" She has an athletic body and is so beautiful. So in her case the pagans would give the gift to the statue of Artemis before a hunt to help hunting. Makes perfect religious sense. Gods need to be entreated. It was a little problem with this religion because this was the religion of Romans who occupied Jewish land. To save Jewish religion and culture Jesus made a sacrifice. He talked with his Jewish god and inspired his people with new ideas, lead people and died for his people. Sounds like a true hero indeed. Even though he was crucified, his ideas are still living between us. That is how Christianity started. fficeffice" />

 

 

PS Damn, I misspelled ?peace' in the previous post.

 

If you attribute all your problems in life to God, and everything what you achieve in life to prayers, then you deprive yourself of a merit and deny yourself a chance of finding true causes of your problems and improving your present life and lives of the people around you. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Discover true Bible http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/inconsistencies.html
Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #2
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:01/10/2007 8:01 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : worriedmum

'Mum',

After the first shock passed I went back to the Bible. No one dared to answer to my post and explain how we actually interpret that scripture. Even the omniscient Didaktikon.

Eh? Did I somewhere miss an opportunity to engage with you?

Yeah, why the Bible is so difficult to understand?

Well, speaking for myself, I don't find it so but that has something to do with me taking the time to learn about it in detail

May be because it uses Shakespeare's language.

Oh, that's good! Lady, there are over 40 English language versions of the Christian Bible available today, and only one of them is written in Elizabethan English (and, incidentally, it certainly isn't the pick of the bunch when it comes to reliability).

King James' version is not bad but today's new international version is better.

Sure. This is your informed opinion, you clearly being something of a biblical scholar?

Still people tend to interpret it the way they want it. So let's keep reading.

Let's!

Mathew 5.23 Jesus words are in red in that bible.

And so you've overlooked another clear indicator of Jesus' deity: the ability to speak in red words! We mere mortals apparently can only speak blackones

"Therefore if you are offering your gift at the altar..." I am pointing it out to you only because I m wondering what sort of gift Jesus talks about, because it is a truly pagan tradition to bring some offerings to an altar. And I hear from my son a lot about Catholicism and how it is build on pagan traditions that is why it is wrong. I don't agree with it, because the new testament is a continuation of the old testament and the old testament is not pagan, it is Jewish. So, it is a very strange teaching in RF. Can anyone comment anything for it, not against? Simply because I heard a lot against it, I want to hear something in support of Catholicism, if you care.

Deary, deary me. This really is base ignorance of the very worst sort 'Mum', the passage has absolutely nothing to do with Catholicism. Jesus was addressing a crowd of Jews. Jews presented offerings on the Temple altars as part and parcel of their religious worship. Jesus was very clearly explaining that the outward action was worthless if it wasn't tempered by an inward conviction. As I've harped long and hard, one needs to appreciate the context if one is to understand the message aright.

I don't understand how Catholicism can be separated from Christianity because for more than thousand years this was the mainstream religion (together with Orthodox of course) and anyone who would think otherwise would be considered a heretic.

As I said, this has nothing to do with Catholicism

We went to Europe just this year and I loved those statues of different gods that were displayed in Paris museums, also in the Vatican museum. The god of love Eros, son of Aphrodite, the goddess of love, is holding his bow with arrow, any minute he is ready to shoot in our hearts, so we would fall in love. The goddess of hunt Artemis (Diana in Roman religion) has been always my favourite. "She loved hunting lions, panther, stag and deer, roaming the mountain forests and uncultivated land with her nymphs. Artemis was also a friend to mortals, dancing through the countryside in silver sandals" She has an athletic body and is so beautiful.

Eh? Is your intention in this post to enter into an exegetical discussion of a portion of Scripture, or to consider the relative merits of aesthetics as such applies to Roman sculpture?

So in her case the pagans would give the gift to the statue of Artemis before a hunt to help hunting. Makes perfect religious sense. Gods need to be entreated. It was a little problem with this religion because this was the religion of Romans who occupied Jewish land.

No doubt.

To save Jewish religion and culture Jesus made a sacrifice. He talked with his Jewish god and inspired his people with new ideas, lead people and died for his people. Sounds like a true hero indeed.

Bollocks.

Lady, clearly you haven't a clue concerning the subject matter of this discussion

Cheerio,

Ian
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #3
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:01/10/2007 8:32 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : worriedmum

'Mum',

Now that I've come across your piece, I thought it best to address your 'concerns'

I am currently reading New Testament, as recommended by many including my own son. How do I understand this?

Let's see, shall we?

Jesus did not let a man to bury his father. He said, "Follow me and let the dead bury their own dead." (Mathew 8.22) I reckon, it was not very nice, as he did not let the man to mourn over his fathers' dead body. What sort of phenomenological language is that?

To begin with Jesus was calling some to close discipleship, to the sacrifice of placing one's personal needs, wants and aspirations second to that of following him. The thrust of the, "...let the dead bury their own..." was the very fact that Jesus was life, and I'm thinking you altogether missed this salient and defining point. Second, by virtue of Jesus being (and bringing) 'life', grief and mourning was improper. It was to elevate the 'finality' of death as victor over and against the victory of Christ as 'life-giver'. Third, such wasn't phenomenological language at all. What it was, however, was the presentation of theological truth and the decision point which invariably follows the same. It was a challenge to choose: 'life' as represented by Jesus, or 'death' as represented by the deceased.

Should we all follow Christ then?

Absolutely

A lot of people actually do so already in all sorts of Bible based cults.

No they don't. Such people follow an aberration of their own devising.

Is this what it means to be a true Christian?

Dumb question.

Then he drowned a herd of pigs, obviously including two possessed men. (M 8.32)

Actually, if you read the passage again you'll find that it was the demons who caused the herd of pigs to be drowned, and those who were formerly oppressed by the demonic were released from their oppression and set free. The passage certainly doesn't present the idea that they drowned alongside the pigs.

If we follow the Christ, it looks like we should say goodbye to our already underfunded mental health care.

Ha, ha, ha. Lady, you're a riot!

Considering the other Jesus' miracles I do believe them in the same way as I believe in alien abduction.

I'm certain that you do!

The worst part of the Bible I think is here. Jesus sends out the 12 apostles to drive out the evil spirits and to heal.

'Yes'. I can see how his mission to free those who were socially outcast, spiritually bound and demonically oppressed would be so offensive to you.

Mathew 10.16. I am sending you out like sheep amongst wolves...10.21 Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. Everyone will hate you because of me...10.34. Do not suppose that I have come to bring piece to the earth. I did not come to bring piece but the sword."

Yep.

How I am supposed to understand this? Enforced Christianity? Or let's kill people for the common good?

Wow. You never cease to amaze at how you can add 'one' plus 'one' and end up with 'five'. Again, it comes down to making a choice and living with the consequences. People are funny, but thoroughly predictable. We humans have a tendency to fear and/or hate what we don't understand. And you, as a perfect example of this truth in action, have demonstrated more than adequately the very same effects, here

This is very disturbing evidence. Against the family values!

Well now, the 'family values' ain't always the right ones, are they?

This is a proclamation of a Crusade against humanity - "...whoever loses their life for my sake will find it" 10.39

Are we reading the same passage?! A crusade against humanity, or humanity crusading against Christianity?

Amazingly, nothing actually said about how to heal people.

Do tell? I thought the passage was perfectly clear on that score.

I am sorry, but I am feeling stressed right now reading this and I have to stop. Too much analogy with Islam.

I'd wager that what you actually understand about Islam would fit on the reverse of a postage stamp. I suggest this confidently, given that such is demonstrably the case with respect to your understanding of Christianity.

I would very worried if I was a Muslim, I would be horrified! As I am scared being a free person.

Oh, you're not free,'mum'. You're completely and inextricably 'bound' by the effects of your ignorance

Cheers,

Ian
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
RF_on_the_edge Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #4
  • Rank:Regular Poster
  • Score:3180
  • Posts:156
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:12/03/2007 10:25 PM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:01/10/2007 8:42 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : worriedmum

I'm responding because you asked me to in another thread.

Your comments indicate that you need some guidance on what you're reading. I'd suggest:

1) finding a small 'o' orthodox church
2) as you say, staying away from the KJV; NIV is modern English, but NLT (agreeing with Ian's advice elsewhere) is better at bringing out the meaning
3) reading with humility and very carefully
4) getting some good commentaries

Here are some examples of why I make those suggestions.

Jesus did not let a man to bury his father. He said, "Follow me and let the dead bury their own dead." (Mathew 8.22)

Yes, this does seem strange, particularly since 'the first commandment with promise' was to honour your father and mother. If I recall correctly, one commentary I read said that it would have been clear to a 1st century reader of the gospel that Jesus was referring to not following a custom of some Jews of having a second burial that went beyond the normal mourning, respecting,  honouring and burial.

PS I just read Ian's reply; seems I got it wrong.

Then he drowned a herd of pigs, obviously including two possessed men. (M 8.32)

Read the corresponding passages in other gospels and you'll see that while the pigs drowned, the men were healed, left with sound mind, and subsequently told their countrymen about Jesus. Their evangelising was so successful that when Jesus returned to the area he was swamped with people asking for Him to heal them.

Mathew 10.16. I am sending you out like sheep amongst wolves...10.21 Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. Everyone will hate you because of me...10.34. Do not suppose that I have come to bring piece to the earth. I did not come to bring piece but the sword."

The context makes it plain that this is saying that Jesus is warning His disciples will be the victims of violence - not the perpetrators!

"Therefore if you are offering your gift at the altar..." I am pointing it out to you only because I m wondering what sort of gift Jesus talks about, because it is a truly pagan tradition to bring some offerings to an altar.

Jesus was talking to 1st century Jews and this is entirely in keeping with what we find in the Old Testament. Even today Christians are to bring a gift to the altar - submitting themselves to God.

 

I'm not going to say anymore here as you need to listen to someone trained in, and understanding of, the context and culture of the bible. As I said, I suggest looking for a small 'o' orthodox church. (Maybe keep your eye out for those advertising 'alpha' courses.) The person who best fits that description on this forum is Ian. So when he says 'bollocks' to something, it would be wise to ask him why he says it. (And keep in mind that 'bollocks' is nothing compared to the 'Get behind me Satan' that Jesus served up to his mate Peter )

RFOTE

Glad-to be out Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #5
  • Rank:Posterior Maximus
  • Score:15160
  • Posts:701
  • From:Faroe_islands
  • Register:07/04/2006 8:57 AM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:01/10/2007 10:15 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : Didaktikon


A lot of people actually do so already in all sorts of Bible based cults.

No they don't. Such people follow an aberration of their own devising.

 Call it a reaction to all the wind we have been having in our neck of the woods lately that always leaves me in a bad mood, BUT, we did not follow an abberation of our OWN devising.

We were looking for answers, the meaning of life , in a bad place in our life journey etc and because we didn't have your knowledge of scripture, we were susceptible to being manipulated by people who seemed at the time to have all the answers.

We were then, very gradually and expertly ,removed from reality and we became the  trapped FOLLOWERS of men who devised their own rules and doctrines. Men who created their own abberation of scripture and practice.

The followers are the victims in these Bible based cults and to suggest otherwise is very unfair.

We are damaged for life in varying degrees. It is not an experience that is fixed by finding a new church or pastor, as the cult mindset is so deeply etched into our psyche that EVERYTHING is filtered through the paranoid defense mechanisms that have been put in place over a number of years.

We are not yet, and probably will never become the educated consumer when it comes to various religions and their doctrines.

For years, we have been told and we believed, that all other religions and belief systems were WRONG and most probably "of the Devil",. It is IMPOSSIBLE for anyone who was not part of these cults and most particularly after reading all this sight ,the GRC in particular ,to realise just how damaging our experience has been.

It was certainly NOT something that we the followers devised. Unless you were a part of the group and were subject to the mind control and thought reform tecniques that were used on us, it is not possible to understand.

Cheers,

Glad

 



"Faith is not about everything turning out OK; Faith is about being OK no matter how things turn out."
Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #6
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:01/10/2007 10:19 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : RF_on_the_edge

Good morning, RFOTE.

Jesus did not let a man to bury his father. He said, "Follow me and let the dead bury their own dead." (Mathew 8.22)

Yes, this does seem strange, particularly since 'the first commandment with promise' was to honour your father and mother. If I recall correctly, one commentary I read said that it would have been clear to a 1st century reader of the gospel that Jesus was referring to not following a custom of some Jews of having a second burial that went beyond the normal mourning, respecting, honouring and burial.

PS I just read Ian's reply; seems I got it wrong.

I wouldn't go so far as to suggest that you got matters 'wrong', at all. There is some evidence that 2nd burials took place in Judea during the 1st century, but [1] such involved the use of ossuaries ('bone boxes'), and [2] this form of re-burial doesn't appear to fit the immediate context of the passage under review (i.e. 'mourning' only took place at the first burial).

The principle thrust of the passage, however, does relate to the representation of 'life' (perhaps 'Life'?) versus 'death' that I introduced in my reply.

Blessings,

Ian
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #7
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:01/10/2007 10:44 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : Glad-to be out

Good morning, 'Glad'.

A lot of people actually do so already in all sorts of Bible based cults.

No they don't. Such people follow an aberration of their own devising.

Call it a reaction to all the wind we have been having in our neck of the woods lately that always leaves me in a bad mood, BUT, we did not follow an abberation of our OWN devising.

What I was suggesting in my response to 'mum', was that people in aberrant groups need to accept a measure of personal responsibility for the circumstances that they find themselves in. After all, we have each made our own choices in this life, having exercised our own 'free-will' into the bargain. It simply won't do to blame: our parents, our friends, the Devil, society, or Noel Hollins for our poor choices. Certainly, many of the previously listed share in a degree of culpability with respect to where we 'are' (or have 'been'), but it's unfair to suggest the blame rests 100% with them.

We were looking for answers, the meaning of life, in a bad place in our life journey etc and because we didn't have your knowledge of scripture, we were susceptible to being manipulated by people who seemed at the time to have all the answers.

All of which is perfectly true, but you did have access to Scripture, and Scripture itself presents the very clear need to be discerning when considering spiritual realities. And, of course, the gospel is very clearly presented in the New Testament too (Paul's refutation of false gospels and legalism equally so). Hence I stated that people follow an "...aberration of their own devising." When we each of us stands before God, it simply won't do to say, "...but, Lord, I was manipulated and deceived by pastor so-and-so." Likely as not he will respond with, "...didn't you have my Word?"

We were then, very gradually and expertly, removed from reality and we became the trapped FOLLOWERS of men who devised their own rules and doctrines. Men who created their own abberation of scripture and practice.

The Bible warns that false shepherds will be judged harshly on that day. However, it also warns that we are to, "...work out our own salvation with fear and trembling."

The followers are the victims in these Bible based cults and to suggest otherwise is very unfair.

Victims? Certainly. Blameless? Not by a long shot. Consider, applying the same defences that you have offered above, I could quite reasonably suggest that Noel Hollins is as much a victim as you, and equally as deserving of our pity. And there would be considerable truth is such a statement. But would this absolve him of responsibility for his actions and their consequences? 'Nope'.

We are damaged for life in varying degrees. It is not an experience that is fixed by finding a new church or pastor, as the cult mindset is so deeply etched into our psyche that EVERYTHING is filtered through the paranoid defense mechanisms that have been put in place over a number of years.

Sure. "Been there, done that" myself But in spite of this, I have never blamed the RCI for my poor choices in life.

We are not yet, and probably will never become the educated consumer when it comes to various religions and their doctrines.

I might be so bold as to suggest that the degree to which people become 'educated' about such matters rests squarely with each person, individually. Again, such is a choice and not a circumstance.

For years, we have been told and we believed, that all other religions and belief systems were WRONG and most probably "of the Devil",. It is IMPOSSIBLE for anyone who was not part of these cults and most particularly after reading all this sight ,the GRC in particular ,to realise just how damaging our experience has been.

I disagree, there's nothing 'speacial' about the GRC experience which sets it apart from any other.

It was certainly NOT something that we the followers devised. Unless you were a part of the group and were subject to the mind control and thought reform tecniques that were used on us, it is not possible to understand.

You, like I, have been given a personality. You, like I, have been endowed with the ability to think and reason. You, like I, enjoy full and unhindered access to the Word of God in many different translations. And you, like I, will be judged by God according to your actions (and/or lack thereof). So I'll reiterate: it simply will not do to lay all the blame for your past condition at the feet of Noel Hollins You made choices too, 'Glad'.

God bless,

Ian
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
Glad-to be out Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #8
  • Rank:Posterior Maximus
  • Score:15160
  • Posts:701
  • From:Faroe_islands
  • Register:07/04/2006 8:57 AM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:01/10/2007 11:51 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : Didaktikon  

What I was suggesting in my response to 'mum', was that people in aberrant groups need to accept a measure of personal responsibility for the circumstances that they find themselves in. After all, we have each made our own choices in this life, having exercised our own 'free-will' into the bargain. It simply won't do to blame: our parents, our friends, the Devil, society, or Noel Hollins for our poor choices. Certainly, many of the previously listed share in a degree of culpability with respect to where we 'are' (or have 'been'), but it's unfair to suggest the blame rests 100% with them.

I would say that we all do accept a small measure of responsibility, probably about 5%.

All of which is perfectly true, but you did have access to Scripture, and Scripture itself presents the very clear need to be discerning when considering spiritual realities. And, of course, the gospel is very clearly presented in the New Testament too (Paul's refutation of false gospels and legalism equally so). Hence I stated that people follow an "...aberration of their own devising." When we each of us stands before God, it simply won't do to say, "...but, Lord, I was manipulated and deceived by pastor so-and-so." Likely as not he will respond with, "...didn't you have my Word?"

We had the Word, but it was twisted scripture. I suggest that you read "Churches That Abuse." and "Recovering From Churches That Abuse." by Dr. Ron Enroth.

The Bible warns that false shepherds will be judged harshly on that day. However, it also warns that we are to, "...work out our own salvation with fear and trembling."


Correct, and now that we are no longer under the influence of NHH, we can see that.

Victims? Certainly. Blameless? Not by a long shot. Consider, applying the same defences that you have offered above, I could quite reasonably suggest that Noel Hollins is as much a victim as you, and equally as deserving of our pity. And there would be considerable truth is such a statement. But would this absolve him of responsibility for his actions and their consequences? 'Nope'.

I even agree with you on this point.

Sure. "Been there, done that" myself But in spite of this, I have never blamed the RCI for my poor choices in life.

I think I/we take full responsibility for choices made in life, but the GRC DID influence those choices because the doctrine of the GRC dictated what the choice was.

I might be so bold as to suggest that the degree to which people become 'educated' about such matters rests squarely with each person, individually. Again, such is a choice and not a circumstance.

You are right and now that we are out of the GRC we are all re-educating ourselves, but the filters remain in our brains depending on the degree of damage.

I disagree, there's nothing 'speacial' about the GRC experience which sets it apart from any other.

To this, I am afraid that we will have to agree to disagree. You are, I believe, totally ignorant of the methods employed and the damage done to people's lives by the GRC.

You, like I, have been given a personality. You, like I, have been endowed with the ability to think and reason. You, like I, enjoy full and unhindered access to the Word of God in many different translations. And you, like I, will be judged by God according to your actions (and/or lack thereof). So I'll reiterate: it simply will not do to lay all the blame for your past condition at the feet of Noel Hollins You made choices too, 'Glad'.

Yes Ian, NOW we have access to such literature, but not while we were captives in the GRC. Before you say that we did, I must reiterate that you have NO understanding of the GRC or Noel Hollins or in fact my personality which was damaged beyond redemption long before I joined the GRC. So again we must agree to disagree. I do not lay the blame for anything to do with my life at the feet of NHH. I will stand before the Lord on judgement day and I am not afraid of that day.

Cheers,

Glad

"Faith is not about everything turning out OK; Faith is about being OK no matter how things turn out."
Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #9
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:01/10/2007 12:09 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : Glad-to be out

Hi, 'Glad'.

I would say that we all do accept a small measure of responsibility, probably about 5%.

That being the case, I'd suggest that you've 'pulled-up' about 65% short ofthe true mark

We had the Word, but it was twisted scripture.

So? The Scripture itself wasn't twisted, you had access to precisely the same recorded Word of God as everyone else, and it was always freely available to you.

I suggest that you read "Churches That Abuse." and "Recovering From Churches That Abuse." by Dr. Ron Enroth.

Why. I'm a biblical theologian who has undertaken formal counselling training, and who has been helping people in aberrant pseudo-Christian groups for about 15 years (Revivalists, Jehovah's Witnesses, etc). And, of course, there's also the fact that I'm a former Revivalist myself

The Bible warns that false shepherds will be judged harshly on that day. However, it also warns that we are to, "...work out our own salvation with fear and trembling."

Correct, and now that we are no longer under the influence of NHH, we can see that.

Sorry, 'Glad, but that sort of 'cop-out' doesn't wash. The passage above applied to you just as fully when you were still in the GRC, as it does now that you're out.

I think I/we take full responsibility for choices made in life, but the GRC DID influence those choices because the doctrine of the GRC dictated what the choice was.

Okay, but your responses above present the very real impression that you haven't taken full responsibility for your life choices at all.

I disagree, there's nothing 'special' about the GRC experience which sets it apart from any other.

To this, I am afraid that we will have to agree to disagree. You are, I believe, totally ignorant of the methods employed and the damage done to people's lives by the GRC.

I think you're mistaken. I've been helping GRC (and RCI, and RF) people to make sense of reality for about 12 years; consequently I'm well aware of the sorts of 'techniques', 'tactics' and 'principles' that have been used by GRC pastors to maintain control over their 'flocks' all along. Noel Hollins didn't 'invent' the personality cult, 'Glad', he simply trod some very well worn paths Now I would probably be correct to infer that your own experience has been, by-and-large, confined to simply the GRC. Consequently, it's probable that you (unlike myself) haven't a particularly broad frame-of-reference to compare your former group's practices against. Trust me, your Revivalist denomination isn't all that different from the one that I came out of, nor is it particularly different to many other controlling groups that I'm acquainted with.

You, like I, have been given a personality. You, like I, have been endowed with the ability to think and reason. You, like I, enjoy full and unhindered access to the Word of God in many different translations. And you, like I, will be judged by God according to your actions (and/or lack thereof). So I'll reiterate: it simply will not do to lay all the blame for your past condition at the feet of Noel Hollins You made choices too, 'Glad'.

Yes Ian, NOW we have access to such literature, but not while we were captives in the GRC.

'Glad', you had access to the literature (the different Bible translations) all along. You simply chose not to investigate such matters whilst you were within the GRC, but that was your choice. Your captivity, therefore, was largely self-imposed (albeit 'conditioned').

Before you say that we did, I must reiterate that you have NO understanding of the GRC or Noel Hollins or in fact my personality which was damaged beyond redemption long before I joined the GRC.

Obviously I can't and won't presume to know anything about your experiences pre-GRC. But please don't presume that I'm automatically ignorant of the GRC and its ways, simply because I was never a member

So again we must agree to disagree. I do not lay the blame for anything to do with my life at the feet of NHH. I will stand before the Lord on judgement day and I am not afraid of that day.

Sure.

Blessings,

Ian
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
MothandRust Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #10
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:41380
  • Posts:1877
  • From:Australia
  • Register:27/02/2004 11:21 PM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:01/10/2007 3:16 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : Didaktikon

When we each of us stands before God, it simply won't do to say, "...but, Lord, I was manipulated and deceived by pastor so-and-so." Likely as not he will respond with, "...didn't you have my Word?"

Likely as not hey? I think you presume to know too much of the mind of god here... but then that comes with such confidence as yours towards what you believe he's getting at.

"...didn't you have my Word?" - Sounds like God's gonna be one sarcastic son of a gun - heh.

With respect, as a Revivalist (ignorant as I was to your's and god's truth) we, or I, felt the bible was being followed to the letter... every jot and tittle and fully believed it, but if god wants to reject the poor sods along with everyone else who had ignorant teachers, then I suppose that's his perogative. It's his planet after all... I suppose. Hopefully he'll be a good judge of people as is hoped.

It seems like good timing and placement have a lot to do whether we make it into the next level.

[LINK SiteName=Mothrust: Movies and Modern Myth Target=_blank]http://aintchristian.blogspot.com.au/[/LINK] Be nice, for everyone that you meet is fighting a harder battle - Anita Roddick
Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #11
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:01/10/2007 3:28 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : Moth & Rust

Hello, Moth. Long time, no hear

Likely as not hey? I think you presume to know too much of the mind of god here... but then that comes with such confidence as yours towards what you believe he's getting at.

Actually, my confidence really stems from a reasonable understanding of what he's seen fit to leave with us, recorded within his Word

"...didn't you have my Word?" - Sounds like God's gonna be one sarcastic son of a gun - heh.

Perhaps he'll be just like Jesus in this regard, when he confronted the Pharisees of an earlier time

With respect, as a Revivalist (ignorant as I was to your's and god's truth) we, or I, felt the bible was being followed to the letter...

No doubt that you did, but then again you weren't following it to the 'letter' at all, were you? In fact, and although you had the 'thing' sitting there right in front of you, available to you whenever you wanted it, you didn't really study it for all it was worth at all. 'Nope', you did then what most Revivalists do to this very day: you trawled through Scripture as if it were little more than a collection of 'proof-texts' available for you to lift at whim and will so as to defend doctrinal nonsense

every jot and tittle, but if god wants to reject the poor sods along with everyone else who had ignorant teachers, then I suppose that's his perogative.

Actually, the rejection part remains your prerogative. And I do seem to recall that we Revivalists were 'big' on 'pooh-poohing' the Roman Catholic Church for having priestly intermediaries that stood between 'us' and God. We Revivalists, on the other hand, claimed that no-one in our fellowships filled such a role. So, Mothman, are you now wanting to have your cake and eat it too?

It's be his planet after all... I suppose.

It is indeed!

Blessings,

Ian

P.S. Adding an 'update' to your 'update':

Hopefully he'll be a good judge of people as is hoped.

I think that's a 'given'. Thoroughly objective, thoroughly impartial and thoroughly just. In other words, the perfect Judge

It seems like good timing and placement have a lot to do whether we make it into the next level.

'Nope'. All that's needed is a willingness to accept responsibility and an openness to 'hearing' Scripture.
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
MothandRust Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #12
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:41380
  • Posts:1877
  • From:Australia
  • Register:27/02/2004 11:21 PM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:01/10/2007 4:12 PMCopy HTML

Hello, Moth. Long time, no hear

Hi Ian! Thought I'd throw something in and be less of a lurker

Likely as not hey? I think you presume to know too much of the mind of god here... but then that comes with such confidence as yours towards what you believe he's getting at.
Actually, my confidence really stems from a reasonable understanding of what he's seen fit to leave with us, recorded within his Word

Feels like he dropped the ball and ran, leaving us to poke at it and wonder.

"...didn't you have my Word?" - Sounds like God's gonna be one sarcastic son of a gun - heh.
Perhaps he'll be just like Jesus in this regard, when he confronted the Pharisees of an earlier time

So yes then, according to the bible we can look forward to the son of a gun's father to be equally sarcastic. I used to chat with a theologian who took great licence in being able to mock and laugh at anyone who didn't agree with him and god's word because that's what 'his' god does in Psalms (1?)... actually, you'd appreciate his work and his ability to cut swathes through his debates with atheists... http://rhoblogy.blogspot.com/ - He takes a lot of delight in cutting down those who are Pro-Catholicism though... I'd love you to engage him because I've never seen anyone get a wedge in.

With respect, as a Revivalist (ignorant as I was to your's and god's truth) we, or I, felt the bible was being followed to the letter...
No doubt that you did, but then again you weren't following it to the 'letter' at all, were you? In fact, and although you had the 'thing' sitting there right in front of you, available to you whenever you wanted it, you didn't really study it for all it was worth at all. 'Nope', you did then what most Revivalists do to this very day: you trawled through Scripture as if it were little more than a collection of 'proof-texts' available for you to lift at whim and will so as to defend doctrinal nonsense

I'm sure that's exactly what I did... 'and there's a thing that seemeth right unto a man', nevertheless... it did seem right at the time and for a many good Revivalists who live and die doing the same thing, it just doesn't seem a fair universe with that belief system you espouse. I'm not knocking it, I'm just not sure I feel it's viable in the big picture. I think the Universalist view had a more workable edge... but then of course I would. I want me cake and the ability to eat it eh? and yeah I do... lol.

every jot and tittle, but if god wants to reject the poor sods along with everyone else who had ignorant teachers, then I suppose that's his perogative.
Actually, the rejection part remains your prerogative. And I do seem to recall that we Revivalists were 'big' on 'pooh-poohing' the Roman Catholic Church for having priestly intermediaries that stood between 'us' and God. We Revivalists, on the other hand, claimed that no-one in our fellowships filled such a role. So, Mothman, are you now wanting to have your cake and eat it too?

...

I think that's a 'given'. Thoroughly objective, thoroughly impartial and thoroughly just. In other words, the perfect Judge

Well, that's good then. That's what I thought he'd have to be. I happened upon this quote this morning that I thought interesting - "Either there is no Creator - or - there is one Creator of our universe who is perfect, conscious, and has a perfect purpose for us.  Anything in between can be ignored."

It seems like good timing and placement have a lot to do whether we make it into the next level.
'Nope'. All that's needed is a willingness to accept responsibility and an openness to 'hearing' Scripture.

I'm not so sure. I think there have been plenty of people through the ages and today who don't have the same opportunities to access scripture, but I'll leave the progression of that thought for another day.

[LINK SiteName=Mothrust: Movies and Modern Myth Target=_blank]http://aintchristian.blogspot.com.au/[/LINK] Be nice, for everyone that you meet is fighting a harder battle - Anita Roddick
worriedmum Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #13
  • Rank:Regular Poster
  • Score:3440
  • Posts:142
  • From:Australia
  • Register:17/08/2007 9:04 PM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:01/10/2007 6:05 PMCopy HTML

Reply to Didaktikonfficeffice" />

 

To begin with Jesus was calling some to close discipleship, to the sacrifice of placing one's personal needs, wants and aspirations second to that of following him. The thrust of the, "...let the dead bury their own..." was the very fact that Jesus was life, and I'm thinking you altogether missed this salient and defining point. Second, by virtue of Jesus being (and bringing) 'life', grief and mourning was improper. It was to elevate the 'finality' of death as victor over and against the victory of Christ as 'life-giver'. Third, such wasn't phenomenological language at all. What it was, however, was the presentation of theological truth and the decision point which invariably follows the same. It was a challenge to choose: 'life' as represented by Jesus, or 'death' as represented by the deceased.

 

No I have not missed the point that "Jesus is life" at all.  However, as you pointed out correctly it is a theological truth, which is different to common sense and normal human logic.

I am trying to construct a philosophical formula to display your theological truth and I forgot how to do it, but I am not afraid of your critique.

Can anyone make a better formula? RF on the edge? Moth? You have studied philosophy.

 

Jesus represents life (1st premise)

Funeral of your father represents death (2nd premise).

Life is better than death. (Priori)

As you choose life over death you should choose Jesus over the funeral of your father.

 

There is a big fault in this argument. This argument may be correct not only if the first premise is correct but also the second is correct. Even though you will insist that the first premise is correct, there is no sense in the second one and experts call this type of logic  "cult mind control".

 

RF- on the edge

There is not enough info in Mathew to conclude that it was the second funeral.

If you attribute all your problems in life to God, and everything what you achieve in life to prayers, then you deprive yourself of a merit and deny yourself a chance of finding true causes of your problems and improving your present life and lives of the people around you. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Discover true Bible http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/inconsistencies.html
Glad-to be out Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #14
  • Rank:Posterior Maximus
  • Score:15160
  • Posts:701
  • From:Faroe_islands
  • Register:07/04/2006 8:57 AM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:01/10/2007 8:06 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : Didakiton & Moth and Rust

Firstly Mothy, glad to see you back in the light and not lurking. Very upset that you "killed off" Alan!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ian, you assume too much, during my life I have had very close relationships / experiences with the C of E, Hitler Youth, Communism, Christadelphians, Mormons, Assembly of God, Jehovah's Witnesses (not just the door knockers), the Jewish faith, Roman Catholicism, Free Masonery, Athiesm, Agnostics, Humanists, Hindus and Muslims, the Shinto belief system, Bhuddism, Lutherans, Methodists and also Baptists who were so cultish in their beliefs and behaviours as to be indescernible from fundamentalists. 

I repeat that you seem to have very little understanding of cults like the GRC and you don't appear to have any empathy with those who have suffered. I don't think that your "been there and done that" experience in the RCI compares with the GRC because the empathy that should be there for the followers just isn't.

I don't care how much experience you have had with regard to counselling people who are trying to exit cults, if you haven't read "Churches That Abuse" and "Recovering From Churches That Abuse" by Dr. Ron Enroth then I suggest you do. It might make you a little more compassionate and not quite so dogmatic when dealing with folk who have been caught up in these groups. One must CONTINUE to educate oneself and not just rest on your laurels of being a "biblical theolgian". I don't suppose you have bothered to read Steven Hassan's "Combatting Cult Mind Control" either, or your responses would be more informed and less judgemental.  

You also say that Hollins is to be pitied, well so are B & S (Pillinut) because they are a product of the GRC.

You seem to have gone from one cultish mindset into another. From one form of seeing things in "black and white" to another.

How long were you in the RCI, and what was your age when you entered and left?

If I offend, I really don't mean to, I just find it annoying / frustrating that yet again here is someone with such a limited understanding of Hollins group that you could possibly say that there was / is nothing special about him or his doctrines etc. We know there are other groups and men like him, but he has had such a catastrophic effect on so many people. Even to say that we could have read other literature while we were in there is so naive and simplistic.

Why do you think that the GRC site has so many hits and so many posts compared to ALL the other sites on the Forum?

Cheers,

Glad

"Faith is not about everything turning out OK; Faith is about being OK no matter how things turn out."
MothandRust Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #15
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:41380
  • Posts:1877
  • From:Australia
  • Register:27/02/2004 11:21 PM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:01/10/2007 9:25 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : Glad-to be out

Mothy, glad to see you back in the light and not lurking. Very upset that you "killed off" Alan!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Ian,

I'm trying for the life of me to work out who Alan is and how I"ve killed him off... confused. Alan is the name of the theologian who I recommended Ian read the blog of... but I didn't mention his actual name. Have we spoken of Alan before? umm... no, I'm missing something here.

 

[LINK SiteName=Mothrust: Movies and Modern Myth Target=_blank]http://aintchristian.blogspot.com.au/[/LINK] Be nice, for everyone that you meet is fighting a harder battle - Anita Roddick
Glad-to be out Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #16
  • Rank:Posterior Maximus
  • Score:15160
  • Posts:701
  • From:Faroe_islands
  • Register:07/04/2006 8:57 AM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:01/10/2007 9:53 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : MothandRust  Sorry to confuse you, glad to get you thinking though!!!!!!! Nothing as highbrow as a biblical scholar. Two words, avatar and  --  Rickman !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Cheers,

Glad


Reply to : Glad-to be outMothy, glad to see you back in the light and not lurking. Very upset that you "killed off" Alan!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Ian,I'm trying for the life of me to work out who Alan is and how I"ve killed him off... confused. Alan is the name of the theologian who I recommended Ian read the blog of... but I didn't mention his actual name. Have we spoken of Alan before? umm... no, I'm missing something here.
"Faith is not about everything turning out OK; Faith is about being OK no matter how things turn out."
worriedmum Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #17
  • Rank:Regular Poster
  • Score:3440
  • Posts:142
  • From:Australia
  • Register:17/08/2007 9:04 PM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:02/10/2007 12:00 PMCopy HTML

Great post Glad- to- be- out. Well done!

"I don't care how much experience you have had with regard to counselling people who are trying to exit cults, if you haven't read "Churches That Abuse" and "Recovering From Churches That Abuse" by Dr. Ron Enroth then I suggest you do. It might make you a little more compassionate and not quite so dogmatic when dealing with folk who have been caught up in these groups. One must CONTINUE to educate oneself and not just rest on your laurels of being a "biblical theolgian". I don't suppose you have bothered to read Steven Hassan's "Combatting Cult Mind Control" either, or your responses would be more informed and less judgemental.  "

Ian is just another product of "cult mind control" unfortunately.

If you attribute all your problems in life to God, and everything what you achieve in life to prayers, then you deprive yourself of a merit and deny yourself a chance of finding true causes of your problems and improving your present life and lives of the people around you. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Discover true Bible http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/inconsistencies.html
Glad-to be out Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #18
  • Rank:Posterior Maximus
  • Score:15160
  • Posts:701
  • From:Faroe_islands
  • Register:07/04/2006 8:57 AM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:02/10/2007 1:16 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : worriedmum     Ian is just another product of "cult mind control" unfortunately.

Thanks worriedmumma, I couldn't agree with you more. Give him time, I'm sure he'll cut me down to size next time he logs on.

Cheers,

Glad

"Faith is not about everything turning out OK; Faith is about being OK no matter how things turn out."
Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #19
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:02/10/2007 4:27 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : Glad-to be out

Reply to : worriedmumIan is just another product of "cult mind control" unfortunately.Thanks worriedmumma, I couldn't agree with you more. Give him time, I'm sure he'll cut me down to size next time he logs on.Cheers,Glad

Actually I think Ian has missed his true calling, he could have been a revival pastor, his way is the only way etc etc

e5

Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #20
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:02/10/2007 5:37 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : MothandRust

Hello, Mothie.

Hi Ian! Thought I'd throw something in and be less of a lurker

Excelleeeent (said with a 'Monty Burns' accent whilst rubbing hands together)

Actually, my confidence really stems from a reasonable understanding of what he's seen fit to leave with us, recorded within his Word

Feels like he dropped the ball and ran, leaving us to poke at it and wonder.

It's funny, but I don't feel that way

Perhaps he'll be just like Jesus in this regard, when he confronted the Pharisees of an earlier time

So yes then, according to the bible we can look forward to the son of a gun's father to be equally sarcastic.

Nope. I was simply making a funny

I used to chat with a theologian who took great licence in being able to mock and laugh at anyone who didn't agree with him and god's word because that's what 'his' god does in Psalms (1?)... actually, you'd appreciate his work and his ability to cut swathes through his debates with atheists... http://rhoblogy.blogspot.com/ - He takes a lot of delight in cutting down those who are Pro-Catholicism though...

And why do you think I'd enjoy his work?

I'd love you to engage him because I've never seen anyone get a wedge in.

Sorry, but 'not interested'. I'm sure there must be a Catholic or two out there who has both the time and the inclination.

With respect, as a Revivalist (ignorant as I was to your's and god's truth) we, or I, felt the bible was being followed to the letter...

No doubt that you did, but then again you weren't following it to the 'letter' at all, were you? In fact, and although you had the 'thing' sitting there right in front of you, available to you whenever you wanted it, you didn't really study it for all it was worth at all. 'Nope', you did then what most Revivalists do to this very day: you trawled through Scripture as if it were little more than a collection of 'proof-texts' available for you to lift at whim and will so as to defend doctrinal nonsense

I'm sure that's exactly what I did... 'and there's a thing that seemeth right unto a man', nevertheless... it did seem right at the time and for a many good Revivalists who live and die doing the same thing, it just doesn't seem a fair universe with that belief system you espouse.

Really? Why?

I'm not knocking it, I'm just not sure I feel it's viable in the big picture. I think the Universalist view had a more workable edge... but then of course I would. I want me cake and the ability to eat it eh? and yeah I do... lol.

Apparently so

every jot and tittle, but if god wants to reject the poor sods along with everyone else who had ignorant teachers, then I suppose that's his perogative.

Actually, the rejection part remains your prerogative. And I do seem to recall that we Revivalists were 'big' on 'pooh-poohing' the Roman Catholic Church for having priestly intermediaries that stood between 'us' and God. We Revivalists, on the other hand, claimed that no-one in our fellowships filled such a role. So, Mothman, are you now wanting to have your cake and eat it too?

No comment to add?

I think that's a 'given'. Thoroughly objective, thoroughly impartial and thoroughly just. In other words, the perfect Judge

Well, that's good then. That's what I thought he'd have to be. I happened upon this quote this morning that I thought interesting - "Either there is no Creator - or - there is one Creator of our universe who is perfect, conscious, and has a perfect purpose for us. Anything in between can be ignored."

Good quote.

It seems like good timing and placement have a lot to do whether we make it into the next level.

'Nope'. All that's needed is a willingness to accept responsibility and an openness to 'hearing' Scripture.

I'm not so sure. I think there have been plenty of people through the ages and today who don't have the same opportunities to access scripture, but I'll leave the progression of that thought for another day.

Sure, but the context of our discussion wasn't people in that situation, but people like you and me.

Gotta go now, time to respond to E5, et al (goody!)

Blessings,

Ian

P.S. I'm in a Canberra motel at the moment, and the so-called 'high-speed' Internet connection dropped out! Had to rush out and buy a cheap telephone lead to get back on, 'dial up'

Anyway, I'm reading a book just now that you might enjoy, it's by the Dutch theologian Anton Houtepen, the English title being, "God: An Open Question" (published by Continuum, 2002). In the book Houtepen explores secularisation, cultural apathy about God in the West, theodicy, pluarlity of religious expression and heaps more. 'Tis a good read, tho' not for the feint-hearted or ignorant. Speaking of which, best I get on with my rejoinder to E5
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
Uncoolman Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #21
  • Rank:Poster Venti III
  • Score:10080
  • Posts:324
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:05/04/2003 2:38 PM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:02/10/2007 7:49 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : Didaktikon

Reply to : MothandRustHello, Mothie.Hi Ian! Thought I'd throw something in and be less of a lurkerExcelleeeent (said with a 'Monty Burns' accent whilst rubbing hands together)Actually, my confidence really stems from a reasonable understanding of what he's seen fit to leave with us, recorded within his WordFeels like he dropped the ball and ran, leaving us to poke at it and wonder.It's funny, but I don't feel that wayPerhaps he'll be just like Jesus in this regard, when he confronted the Pharisees of an earlier timeSo yes then, according to the bible we can look forward to the son of a gun's father to be e

'Tis a good read, tho' not for the feint-hearted or ignorant. Speaking of which, best I get on with my rejoinder to E5

Didi dont waste your time bro, Ill just snigger in ignorance lol

 

Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #22
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:02/10/2007 8:24 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : 'mum', 'Glad' and E5

Buenos notches, 'mum', 'Glad' and E5.

A group response, I'm afraid, beginning with 'mum'!

No I have not missed the point that "Jesus is life" at all. However, as you pointed out correctly it is a theological truth, which is different to common sense and normal human logic.

I see But seriously, the Bible is a theological book; consequently, it should be approached with that perspective in mind (or, at the very least, with an 'open' mind).

I am trying to construct a philosophical formula to display your theological truth and I forgot how to do it, but I am not afraid of your critique.

Cool. If you need help with the philosophy angle, formulae and all, 'hoy' out and I'll lend a hand

Can anyone make a better formula? RF on the edge? Moth? You have studied philosophy.

Me too! Me too! Me too!

Jesus represents life (1st premise)... Funeral of your father represents death (2nd premise)... Life is better than death. (Priori)

A priori? Or a fortiori?

As you choose life over death you should choose Jesus over the funeral of your father.

Eh?!

There is a big fault in this argument.

Actually, I'd suggest that the 'big fault', as you have called it (did you mean, logical fallacy?) rests with your entire process of reasoning: it's been neither logical nor philosophical.

This argument may be correct not only if the first premise is correct but also the second is correct. Even though you will insist that the first premise is correct, there is no sense in the second one and experts call this type of logic "cult mind control".

Well now, I hate to tell you this, but your 'logic' is deeply flawed. Either that, or else you've failed to adequately present your argument as you properly intended. There is a third possibility, however, and that is that I'm so absolutely obtuse that I failed to see your very clear argument and reasoning process!

RF- on the edge... There is not enough info in Mathew to conclude that it was the second funeral.

Really? You might be interested in consulting Matthew's gospel again

Moving on, and heeellooo, 'Glad'!

Ian, you assume too much, during my life I have had very close relationships / experiences with the C of E, Hitler Youth, Communism, Christadelphians, Mormons, Assembly of God, Jehovah's Witnesses (not just the door knockers), the Jewish faith, Roman Catholicism, Free Masonery, Athiesm, Agnostics, Humanists, Hindus and Muslims, the Shinto belief system, Bhuddism, Lutherans, Methodists and also Baptists who were so cultish in their beliefs and behaviours as to be indescernible from fundamentalists.

Wow! With that sort of polysemical background, just how is it that you were 'suckered' into the GRC?! Surely you must have/should have/could have seen it coming?!

I repeat that you seem to have very little understanding of cults like the GRC and you don't appear to have any empathy with those who have suffered. I don't think that your "been there and done that" experience in the RCI compares with the GRC because the empathy that should be there for the followers just isn't.

I've no interest in being the 'Agony Aunt' here, so you'll just have to make allowance for, and/or excuse, my overtly 'clinical' (and often 'tongue-in-cheek') approach to matters. Whilst I'm sure I could be 'gushing' thereby being everyone's friend; or totally 'dry' as dust and booooriiing in my approach; but neither would be as challenging to 'folks' like you, nor as fruitful to those wanting solid and certain answers (nor as entertaining--for me!) as the way I do things now. So you'll just have to make do, I suppose

I don't care how much experience you have had with regard to counselling people who are trying to exit cults, if you haven't read "Churches That Abuse" and "Recovering From Churches That Abuse" by Dr. Ron Enroth then I suggest you do.

I seriously doubt that Dr Enroth's two 'popular'-level books would present anything 'new' to the material that I've adequately gleaned from the psychological literature, the pastoral counselling journals, and the wide range of 'cult'-specific publications that I've consulted over the years. And to be honest, experience indicates that my methods work just fine, thank you very much

It might make you a little more compassionate and not quite so dogmatic when dealing with folk who have been caught up in these groups.

Even my compassion has its bounds! But seriously, I deal in and with facts, not feelings (read 'emotions'). Then there is the fact that forae such as this one are 'faceless' and one-dimensional, and are prone to generating 'personality cults' of a rather unique sort.

One must CONTINUE to educate oneself and not just rest on your laurels of being a "biblical theolgian". I don't suppose you have bothered to read Steven Hassan's "Combatting Cult Mind Control" either, or your responses would be more informed and less judgemental.

'Glad', please try to understand that I've read far more, and far more widely on this subject that you are ever likely too, so try not to confuse my robust and 'devil-may-care' approach to matters here (I laugh in the face of danger!), with either ignorance or ambivalence.

You also say that Hollins is to be pitied, well so are B & S (Pillinut) because they are a product of the GRC.

Sure, but 'pity' has its limits too (see James 3:1, for starters).

You seem to have gone from one cultish mindset into another. From one form of seeing things in "black and white" to another.

Be very, very careful about making accusations of this sort. I'm very well aware of the limits to my knowledge, expertise and understanding, just as I'm very well aware of the strengths of the positions that I have adopted and promote here. If your interest is more towards the 'wishy-washy' (a nice Revival-ism if ever there was one) end of the theological pool, well, there are one or two personalities who frequent this site that you could engage with! I must apologise, but I don't do 'whimp'

How long were you in the RCI, and what was your age when you entered and left?

Entered at the impressionable age of 17 years, having absolutely no prior Christian faith commitment, to then 'enjoy' the ministries of Darcy Ryan (Brisbane) and Russ Gay (Toowoomba, ol' Frankie's pastor). I married in the fellowship, and then subsequently left, all within the space of 3 and one-half years. I endured the next four or so years of absolute spiritual and emotional turmoil, but then decided that it was high time to get my head around things. Last, but by no means least, I've been researching Revivalist 'theology', as an area of academic expertise, for the past eight or so years.

If I offend, I really don't mean to, I just find it annoying / frustrating that yet again here is someone with such a limited understanding of Hollins group that you could possibly say that there was / is nothing special about him or his doctrines etc.

Well, here's the thing: speak with anyone formerly in the CAI and they'll tell you that matters there were probably ten times worse than in the GRC! Speak with many former RCI devotees from, for example, either Townsville or Brisbane and they'll have their own horror stories and litanies of woe. Speak to former RF-er's who've come out of, again for example, either Adelaide or (more recently) Melbourne, and the message will be pretty much the same. As I tried to point out to you previously, your personal Revivalist context is the GRC, and that's it. I've been a little more broad in my research and my involvement, with the end result being that my personal context isn't quite so limited (and neither is it unduly biased by personal subjectivity).

We know there are other groups and men like him, but he has had such a catastrophic effect on so many people.

I could name a score of RCI and RF leaders who've had catastrophic impacts on the lives of many, many non-GRC Revivalists too. And that's precisely my point: you're far too subjective in your assessments, and far too limited in your experiences of the wider 'Revivalism'.

Even to say that we could have read other literature while we were in there is so naive and simplistic.

Scroll back up this thread and you'll soon notice that the only 'other' literature that I have referred to has been alternate English Bible versions to the KJV. And they are read within the GRC.

Why do you think that the GRC site has so many hits and so many posts compared to ALL the other sites on the Forum?

There are many reasons: local media attention that the Geelong GRC has received over time, Noel Hollins' ramblings about this site from the platform, the evangelising efforts (antics?) of the Warrens, etc.

(from 'mum') Ian is just another product of "cult mind control" unfortunately.

Thanks worriedmumma, I couldn't agree with you more. Give him time, I'm sure he'll cut me down to size next time he logs on.

Alas and alack, the 'fickleness' of humanity! Only last week I was apparently your 'bestest-buddy', the person that you turned to for advice and guidance. But having seen fit of late to point out some inconsistencies in what you've maintained, suddenly I'm just another bad, bad 'cultie'

And now, the 'coup-de-grace' from good ol' E5 (who can always be relied upon to generate some chuckles)!

Actually I think Ian has missed his true calling, he could have been a revival pastor, his way is the only way etc etc

Bwah, ha, ha, ha. Still 'smarting' from the last 'slapping', eh Earthie?

Blessings, one and all.

Ian
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
MothandRust Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #23
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:41380
  • Posts:1877
  • From:Australia
  • Register:27/02/2004 11:21 PM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:02/10/2007 9:48 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : Didaktikon

Reply to : 'mum', 'Glad' and E5Buenos notches, 'mum', 'Glad' and E5.A group response, I'm afraid, beginning with 'mum'!No I have not missed the point that "Jesus is life" at all. However, as you pointed out correctly it is a theological truth, which is different to common sense and normal human logic.I seeBut seriously, the Bibleisa theological book; consequently, itshouldbe approached with that perspective in mind (or, at the very least, with an 'open' mind).

That whole reply was brilliant man.

It was so frank... it was franker than Frank... quite frankly.

The content, punctuation and grammar were all spot on the money and and just so much fun to read. Kudos to you because you don't get enough thanks for your consistent work here. Totally appreciated and I love how you effortless shake off any cheap shots. Thanks for some insight into your history with the Revival churches.

"Either there is no Creator - or - there is one Creator of our universe who is perfect, conscious, and has a perfect purpose for us. Anything in between can be ignored."

I do love this quote and I'd have to admit I agree with it. Admitting I thought there was a Creator... well, that'd be a huge step for me, but anecdotal agnostic/atheist quotes and musings aside, I'd have to say my gut leans towards a creative force. And it's the work of the blogging theologian I mentioned earlier that sways me towards that concept. Using that logic I have to say that the latter half of the quote comes into play. Quite a daunting thought to say the least. I would love the latter part of the quote to be true... well, it's a start.

[LINK SiteName=Mothrust: Movies and Modern Myth Target=_blank]http://aintchristian.blogspot.com.au/[/LINK] Be nice, for everyone that you meet is fighting a harder battle - Anita Roddick
Glad-to be out Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #24
  • Rank:Posterior Maximus
  • Score:15160
  • Posts:701
  • From:Faroe_islands
  • Register:07/04/2006 8:57 AM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:02/10/2007 11:26 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : Didaktikon  I just wrote a huge reply to you and for some reason it disappeared into the ether.

The long and the short of it was. No, actually it will just have to be the short of it.

I have and still do live a diverse life, one that allows me to mix with and experience all manner of religions and cultures but it is also a life that has been damaged irreparably by my upbringing and NHH.

I believe the Forum to be a wonderful tool for anyone coming out of the various cults to find some guidance and help and yes, I deferred to your knowledge of scripture. I found your writing to be refreshing and the obvious amount of time that you dedicate to your answers is great.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that I regarded you as my bestest buddy, but you are right, I did turn to YOU for advice and guidance which was greatly appreciated and as a result saw a positive outcome to a situation. 

I will still ask for your advice, whether or not you give it is up to you.

I realise that I am inconsistent in many things, but I also realise that I still have hang ups from my cult days.

Cheers,

Glad


Reply to : 'mum', 'Glad' and E5Buenos notches, 'mum', 'Glad' and E5.A group response, I'm afraid, beginning with 'mum'!No I have not missed the point that "Jesus is life" at all. However, as you pointed out correctly it is a theological truth, which is different to common sense and normal human logic.I seeBut seriously, the Bibleisa theological book; consequently, itshouldbe approached with that perspective in mind (or, at the very least, with an 'open' mind).I am trying to construct a philosophical formula to display your theological truth and I forgot how to do it, but I am not afraid of your critique.Cool. If you need help with the philosophy angle, formulae and all, 'hoy' out and I'll lend a hand
"Faith is not about everything turning out OK; Faith is about being OK no matter how things turn out."
Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #25
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:03/10/2007 7:29 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : earth5

E5,

Top of the morning to you!

'Tis a good read, tho' not for the feint-hearted or ignorant. Speaking of which, best I get on with my rejoinder to E5

Didi dont waste your time bro, Ill just snigger in ignorance lol

You've probably already noticed that I don't 'waste' too much of my time on you as it is Now the question that you need to grapple with is this: was I implying that you were ignorant, or feint-hearted? In any case, I doubt that you would find the book that I recommended to Moth to be a particularly good read. It's not particularly Bevere-esque

Blessings,

Ian
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
worriedmum Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #26
  • Rank:Regular Poster
  • Score:3440
  • Posts:142
  • From:Australia
  • Register:17/08/2007 9:04 PM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:03/10/2007 2:29 PMCopy HTML

Group reply as wellfficeffice" />

 

Didaktikon

 

Reply to your earlier post:

As I said, this has nothing to do with Catholicism.

This is what your specific theologian truth teaches, in contrary to the historical facts.

According to Morgan "The Bible consists of a collection of sixty-six separate books. These books were chosen, after a bit of haggling, by the Catholic Council of Carthage in 397 A.D" However, there is evidence that the earliest evangelic scriptures were written in ancient Greek not Hebrew. So, Christianity started where? Were the first Christians originally pagan Greeks? How come it is the God's word?

 

To save Jewish religion and culture Jesus made a sacrifice. He talked with his Jewish god and inspired his people with new ideas, lead people and died for his people. Sounds like a true hero indeed.
Bollocks.

Absolutely agree. Simply because there is no historical evidence about Jesus apart form the Bible and the Bible is historically inconsistent. You can call it a theologian truth again, I don't mind. You will say the Bible is right, all other books are wrong, because they are ...pagan... communists... Jewish...etc.

This is what you do.

 

I see But seriously, the Bible is a theological book; consequently, it should be approached with that perspective in mind (or, at the very least, with an 'open' mind).

 Exactly, I do approach it now (not like years ago) with an open mind and I laugh at its absurdity.

Cool. If you need help with the philosophy angle, formulae and all, 'hoy' out and I'll lend a hand

Hoy!

We are all waiting. Can you, please, create a formula to prove that that man had to go with Jesus not to his father's funeral?


There is a third possibility, however, and that is that I'm so absolutely obtuse that I failed to see your very clear argument and reasoning process!
I don't want to say obtuse, more likely thoroughly brainwashed.


Really? You might be interested in consulting Matthew's gospel again

Yes, I did, actually. And what is your point? Did you?

 

What could we do without you, Dadi?

 

MothandRust

 

I'd have to say my gut leans towards a creative force

 

Oh, no! Please! You are much more intelligent than this! I do admire Ian's dogmatic view to life, but I like you more when you are agnostic.  What is the name of your god, anyway?

  

RF on the edge.

I do listen to people's advice sometimes. Checked out an orthodox church. It was pathetic. They actually believe that Mary was ever virgin and Jesus did not have brothers, they were his cousins instead. The best part was of it was when a pastor said speaking in tongues is demonic, however another pastor said he used to go to one of the Christian churches and he still occasionally speaks in tongues.

If you attribute all your problems in life to God, and everything what you achieve in life to prayers, then you deprive yourself of a merit and deny yourself a chance of finding true causes of your problems and improving your present life and lives of the people around you. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Discover true Bible http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/inconsistencies.html
RF_on_the_edge Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #27
  • Rank:Regular Poster
  • Score:3180
  • Posts:156
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:12/03/2007 10:25 PM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:03/10/2007 5:02 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : worriedmum

 

Hopefully this will be my last comment on this thread. (I know, I know, I said that before ...)

 

Hey ... Since (according to another thread) you're wondering if there even is a supreme being that made the universe, maybe you should deal with that issue as a higher priority than what you see as problems with the Christian bible. After all, if there's no God then maybe your time and energy would be better spent elsewhere. And if you do end up believing there is a god, you might find the Jewish or Islamic one, or one of the Hindu ones (Ganesh gets some of press, but Krishna seems to have a bigger following in Oz) a better choice.

 

I do listen to people's advice sometimes. Checked out an orthodox church. It was pathetic.


OK, but it's evident you do need help understanding what's written in the bible and it's context. (Eg, you do realise that the written linga franca of the Jews in 1st century Palestine was koine Greek, just as in the rest of the Roman world??! "No non-biblical historical evidence of Jesus" - Sounds like you've been believing ill-informed SBS TV specials! )

 

They actually believe that Mary was ever virgin and Jesus did not have brothers, they were his cousins instead.

 

OK So that means they can't help you with the understanding the bible? If that's a road block, why not check out another denomination? As I said you evidently do need some guidance ... if you want to give the bible a fair dinkum fair go. Here's a thought, you could pray (with feeling) something like, "If you exist and if you're out there somewhere God, lead me to somewhere I can find you."

 

The best part was of it was when a pastor said speaking in tongues is demonic, however another pastor said he used to go to one of the Christian churches and he still occasionally speaks in tongues.

 

Seems strange that he would have said "he used to go to one of the Christian churches" as that suggests that he didn't think that where you met him was a "Christian church"!!?

RFOTE

 

MothandRust Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #28
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:41380
  • Posts:1877
  • From:Australia
  • Register:27/02/2004 11:21 PM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:03/10/2007 5:14 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : worriedmum

I see but seriously, the Bible is a theological book; consequently, it should be approached with that perspective in mind (or, at the very least, with an 'open' mind).

Exactly, I do approach it now (not like years ago) with an open mind and I laugh at its absurdity.

I personally find the bible to be a wholly remarkable piece of literature. Even if one was to pooh-pooh the whole thing as a product of man, I would still find the parables, analogies and mythical stories to be rich in really deep, rich and interesting ideas. I think the poetry of Psalms has some wonderful metaphor and prompts so much. I love analysing the same thing that was mused over by someone else thousands of years ago. I'm sure there are other ancient books where I could do this but I couldn't be bothered seeking them out. The bible is the one I know and keeps me busy enough.

MothandRust - I'd have to say my gut leans towards a creative force.

Oh, no! Please! You are much more intelligent than this! I do admire Ian's dogmatic view to life, but I like you more when you are agnostic.  What is the name of your god, anyway?

I would certainly hate to disappoint you.. ha... actually, I don't really care for the idea of someone pleading with me to be swayed to their point of view. I try to care less about whether I'm getting brownie points for leaning towards any particular view, but I think my recent statement firmly sets me in the Agnostic camp. I acknowledge the possibility of a god whereas an atheist has seared off that option... the agnostic is a great fence-sitter. I find many MANY bible concepts to be completely ridiculous, but that is usually to do with stupidity and mistranslation... from what I can see. I mean, many of your glassy-eyed non-thinkers actually consider and believe that their perfect god will allow a significant part of its creation to be tortured for all eternity.

 

I find the idea of the universe popping itself into existance as believable as a creative personality that popped itself into existance and popped everything into existance... after a fashion. So yeah the name of my god is... 'universe' or 'god' or 'big fat Freddy'... whatever... should it exist and have another long life in store after this short and confusing one then that's all well and good. If I die and cease to be, then who gives a rat's. If I should find myself being tortured in Hell for eternity, then at least I'll be content in knowing that I was right in saying that such a god is a complete dick.

RF on the edge.

I do listen to people's advice sometimes. Checked out an orthodox church. It was pathetic. They actually believe that Mary was ever virgin and Jesus did not have brothers, they were his cousins instead. The best part was of it was when a pastor said speaking in tongues is demonic, however another pastor said he used to go to one of the Christian churches and he still occasionally speaks in tongues.

 

Yeah, those are the stupid Christians I was mentioning.

[LINK SiteName=Mothrust: Movies and Modern Myth Target=_blank]http://aintchristian.blogspot.com.au/[/LINK] Be nice, for everyone that you meet is fighting a harder battle - Anita Roddick
Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #29
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:04/10/2007 8:02 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : worriedmum

Hello, 'mum'.

As I said, this has nothing to do with Catholicism.

This is what your specific theologian truth teaches, in contrary to the historical facts.

We'll see

According to Morgan "The Bible consists of a collection of sixty-six separate books. These books were chosen, after a bit of haggling, by the Catholic Council of Carthage in 397 A.D" However, there is evidence that the earliest evangelic scriptures were written in ancient Greek not Hebrew. So, Christianity started where? Were the first Christians originally pagan Greeks? How come it is the God's word?

To paraphrase a little literature, "How dumb is the above statement? Let me count the ways!" First up, the Council of Carthage was a local synod, and not an Ecumenical Council (consequently, it wasn't binding on the Church Universal). Second, they 'chose' nothing, but discussed much. Third, you might be interested to learn that Athanasius released a festal letter to the churches under his authority, a letter which listed the books of the NT canon, some 30 years before the Council of Carthage! In other words, the 'list' of accepted and authoritative books was well known long before any Council met to discuss such matters. Fourth, the entire NT was written in Greek. Hardly surprising, given that Greek was the lingua franca of the entire Roman Empire (including Palestine)!

Yet again, m'dear, you have demonstrated that you're not only ignorant of the subject matter under discussion, but you lack the basic research skills required to seek out and establish such facts.

To save Jewish religion and culture Jesus made a sacrifice. He talked with his Jewish god and inspired his people with new ideas, lead people and died for his people. Sounds like a true hero indeed.

Bollocks.

Absolutely agree. Simply because there is no historical evidence about Jesus apart form the Bible and the Bible is historically inconsistent.

No-one is that ignorant about the facts of the matter! The reality of Jesus' existence is recorded by the Roman historian Tacitus (115 AD), when describing why Nero burned Rome in 64 AD. The Roman Governor Trajan similarly mentioned Jesus in 112 AD, when recording his actions against the Christians. Josephus, the pro-Roman Jewish historian mentioned Jesus in his work too, written about 90 AD. And, of course, there is the fact that the Jewish Pharisaical tradition also waxes lyrical on the subject of Jesus in various passages of the Talmud.

You can call it a theologian truth again, I don't mind. You will say the Bible is right, all other books are wrong, because they are ...pagan... communists... Jewish...etc. This is what you do.

Again, bollocks!

I see But seriously, the Bible is a theological book; consequently, it should be approached with that perspective in mind (or, at the very least, with an 'open' mind).

Exactly, I do approach it now (not like years ago) with an open mind and I laugh at its absurdity.

Ma'am, it isn't the Bible which has been guilty of making absurd and uninformed statements, of late

Cool. If you need help with the philosophy angle, formulae and all, 'hoy' out and I'll lend a hand

Hoy! We are all waiting. Can you, please, create a formula to prove that that man had to go with Jesus not to his father's funeral?

Methinks you completely misunderstand how logic 'works'. Mathematical formula are used in propositional logic to establish matters such as contingency, tautology and falsifiability (e.g. over the real numbers, any assignment to x makes the formula x2 ≥ 0 true, so in this respect, it's similar to a tautology.)

There is a third possibility, however, and that is that I'm so absolutely obtuse that I failed to see your very clear argument and reasoning process!

I don't want to say obtuse, more likely thoroughly brainwashed.

Okay

Really? You might be interested in consulting Matthew's gospel again

Yes, I did, actually. And what is your point? Did you?

My point is strictly grammatical. Have a look at the passage again, and this time, trace what is the subject according to rules of English grammar

What could we do without you, Dadi?

Well, in your case at least, you'd remain wholly ignorant concerning matters of Scriptural interpretation, propositional logic, history and English grammar!


I do listen to people's advice sometimes.

Sure you do.

Checked out an orthodox church. It was pathetic.

So you checked out an Orthodox Church, huh? How comfortable did you find their pews, and what colour were the cusions on them (they're the same for all Orthodox churches)?

They actually believe that Mary was ever virgin and Jesus did not have brothers, they were his cousins instead.

Yes, but do you know why they believe this?

The best part was of it was when a pastor said speaking in tongues is demonic, however another pastor said he used to go to one of the Christian churches and he still occasionally speaks in tongues.

That's interesting. The Orthodox don't have pastors, they have priests.

Back to the books for you, methinks!

Ian

email: didaktikon@gmail.com
worriedmum Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #30
  • Rank:Regular Poster
  • Score:3440
  • Posts:142
  • From:Australia
  • Register:17/08/2007 9:04 PM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:05/10/2007 9:39 PMCopy HTML

OK Dida,

<Cool. If you need help with the philosophy angle, formulae and all, 'hoy' out and I'll lend a hand

Hoy! We are all waiting. Can you, please, create a formula to prove that that man had to go with Jesus not to his father's funeral?

Methinks you completely misunderstand how logic 'works'. Mathematical formula are used in propositional logic to establish matters such as contingency, tautology and falsifiability (e.g. over the real numbers, any assignment to x makes the formula x2 ≥ 0 true, so in this respect, it's similar to a tautology.) >

I am wrong and you are right. It looks like I dont undersand how the logic of yours works. Where is the promised formula that we all could understand?

If you attribute all your problems in life to God, and everything what you achieve in life to prayers, then you deprive yourself of a merit and deny yourself a chance of finding true causes of your problems and improving your present life and lives of the people around you. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Discover true Bible http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/inconsistencies.html
whodoyouthinkyouare Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #31
  • Rank:Noob
  • Score:350
  • Posts:16
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:22/02/2006 4:29 PM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:06/10/2007 12:12 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : Didaktikon


No-one is that ignorant about the facts of the matter! The reality of Jesus' existence is recorded by the Roman historian Tacitus (115 AD), when describing why Nero burned Rome in 64 AD. The Roman Governor Trajan similarly mentioned Jesus in 112 AD, when recording his actions against the Christians. Josephus, the pro-Roman Jewish historian mentioned Jesus in his work too, written about 90 AD. And, of course, there is the fact that the Jewish Pharisaical tradition also waxes lyrical on the subject of Jesus in various passages of the Talmud.

The evidence for Jesus' existence is very scant and quite questionable. I'm not much for conspiracy theories myself but one isn't necessary here. I don't think anyone "just made up Jesus one day". If you look at the history of the Christian church, you see a plausible, and indeed probable, scenario where the story evolved over time. This history seems to start with the 1st century Gnostics, for whom the Christ was a higher spirit. Then the Gospels were written down, perhaps intended as parables. Then the Literalists came along who insisted the story was a true story, true to urban legend form. Then an official church was established and the dogma was set in 325. The rest is history.

If the mythology is true there should be much more written about him. In fact, there wouldn't be enough books to hold the information (to cite the scriptural exaggeration). Jesus may have preached to an illiterate society but what of the philosophers, religious leaders, statesmen and officials of the time? Forget the miracles. Even discarding them as folklore, there's still the successful and controversial ministry of Jesus. Did they have nothing to say about it?

Here's a video response to the quote above:

Skeptic Bible Study: Jesus Never Existed

Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #32
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:06/10/2007 3:21 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : whodoyouthinkyouare

Hello, WDYTYA (*whew!*).

The evidence for Jesus' existence is very scant and quite questionable. I'm not much for conspiracy theories myself but one isn't necessary here. I don't think anyone "just made up Jesus one day". If you look at the history of the Christian church, you see a plausible, and indeed probable, scenario where the story evolved over time. This history seems to start with the 1st century Gnostics, for whom the Christ was a higher spirit.

I see several problems with your theory, as elucidated above. First, people who were diametrically opposed to Christianity were 'kicking' around during the first century, and they do record that the person of Jesus as an historical fact. Incidentally, not even the most radical of the radical historians or theologians still present the 'Jesus-was-a-myth' position anymore. Second, the first of the NT writings composed were those of Paul, which were written within twenty to thirty years of the crucifixion. It would be quite difficult to invent a 'Jesus myth', and pass it off successfully. In any case, Paul himself specifically mentioned that the eyewitnesses to the resurrection of Jesus numbered about 500 people. And, of course, even the Jews of Jesus' day are on the 'record' as believing that he was very real, and that he worked a range of 'wonders'

Then the Gospels were written down, perhaps intended as parables.

I think it best that you do a little research into the nature of the genre of Gospel. A good place to start would be Richard Burridge's book, "What are the Gospels: A comparison with Greco-Roman Biography", recently re-published by Eerdmans. It currently enjoys the stature of being the academic standard on the subject.

Then the Literalists came along who insisted the story was a true story, true to urban legend form. Then an official church was established and the dogma was set in 325. The rest is history.

Sorry, big fella, but the Church was already about 300 years old by the time Nicea was convened (325 AD)

If the mythology is true there should be much more written about him. In fact, there wouldn't be enough books to hold the information (to cite the scriptural exaggeration).

Do you know, it's actually quite ironic, but there's more that was written about Jesus from within one hundred years of his life and death, then there was about Julius Caesar! Care to posit that he never existed?

Jesus may have preached to an illiterate society but what of the philosophers, religious leaders, statesmen and officials of the time?

I think you misunderstand just how literate Palestine was during the first century! And, of course, Jesus did, in fact, preach to the very classes of society that you inferred he didn't, above (Pharisees, Sadducees, Roman Governors, etc)

Forget the miracles. Even discarding them as folklore, there's still the successful and controversial ministry of Jesus. Did they have nothing to say about it?

Oh, but they did. They actually had plenty to say about! Take a stroll through the Talmud

Blessings,

Ian

P.S. Your written tone and style seems very familiar to me
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #33
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:06/10/2007 3:26 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : worriedmum

Hi, 'mum'.

I am wrong and you are right. It looks like I dont undersand how the logic of yours works.

'Yep', it looks that way, doesn't it?

Where is the promised formula that we all could understand?

Alas, you apparently still don't get it. Introduce a little propositional logic, and there will be formalae enough to keep even the most ardent 'nerd' happy

Cheerio,

Ian
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
whodoyouthinkyouare Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #34
  • Rank:Noob
  • Score:350
  • Posts:16
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:22/02/2006 4:29 PM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:07/10/2007 12:16 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : Didaktikon

I see several problems with your theory, as elucidated above. First, people who were diametrically opposed to Christianity were 'kicking' around during the first century, and they do record that the person of Jesus as an historical fact. Incidentally, not even the most radical of the radical historians or theologians still present the 'Jesus-was-a-myth' position anymore. Second, the first of the NT writings composed were those of Paul, which were written within twenty to thirty years of the crucifixion. It would be quite difficult to invent a 'Jesus myth', and pass it off successfully. In any case, Paul himself specifically mentioned that the eyewitnesses to the resurrection of Jesus numbered about 500 people. And, of course, even the Jews of Jesus' day are on the 'record' as believing that he was very real, and that he worked a range of 'wonders'

Truly? There were first century writings that record Jesus as a historical fact? Can you produce any of them? And why did so many Gnostic Christians believe otherwise?



Oh, but they did. They actually had plenty to say about! Take a stroll through the Talmud



There is a great deal of doubt whether or not Paul thought Jesus walked the earth and our copies of his writings date to the 3rd century, some of which are fakes, so God knows what Paul actually believed. And no, the Jews of the day aren't on record as saying Jesus existed. The Talmudic reference is vague and 5th century.

Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #35
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:07/10/2007 8:25 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : whodoyouthinkyouare

Good morning, bloke (which is easier to type than 'whodoyouthinkyouare').

Truly? There were first century writings that record Jesus as a historical fact? Can you produce any of them? And why did so many Gnostic Christians believe otherwise?

You could begin with Josephus. He was born in 30 AD, he lived during the Jewish uprising, and he wrote towards the close of the first century. He mentions both Jesus and his brother James. Next, of course, there are the 27 books of the NT. They too were written during the first century Then there's the letter of Clement, written from Rome to the Christians of Corinth, which also was written during the (latter part of the) first century. "Them's the facts, bro'"

As for the second part of your question, the Gnostics that you allude to were active during the late second century onwards, and not the first. The 'proto-Gnostics' that were encountered by men such as the apostle John, those who lived during the first and second centuries, didn't deny the historicity of Jesus at all. What they taught was either: 1. that the man Jesus was overshadowed by the spiritual Christ, or 2. that the 'man' Jesus, the one whom people interacted with, was in reality a corporeal vision. Whilst he seemed real enough, and felt real enough, he was, in reality, strictly a spiritual being. Now both of these positions stemmed from the Platonic position concerning matter versus spirit.


Oh, but they did. They actually had plenty to say about! Take a stroll through the Talmud


There is a great deal of doubt whether or not Paul thought Jesus walked the earth and our copies of his writings date to the 3rd century, some of which are fakes, so God knows what Paul actually believed.

Really? Paul's letters make plain that he fully believed that Jesus "walked the earth", as you put things, but I would really love for you to present some evidence that would substantiate your assertion to the contrary Second, you've claimed that the only copies that we have of Paul's writings date from the 3rd century onwards. What you've failed to appreciate is that we have direct quotations from (as well as numerous allusions to) his writings by the Church Fathers of the first through third centuries, including from the letter of Clement that I previously mentioned! Sorry, but you've 'missed the mark' with respect to the established facts, yet again.

And no, the Jews of the day aren't on record as saying Jesus existed. The Talmudic reference is vague and 5th century.

Josephus was a Jew Further, if you knew much about the Talmud, then you would understand that a significant portion of it is referred to as the Mishna, which itself dates from the late 2nd century, and which records the sayings of the Jewish Fathers dating back to before the 1st century. Further, there is more than simply the one reference to Jesus in the Talmud, there are quite a few, and they a far from vague.

Sorry, bloke, but you've failed to establish any support for your case, which is itself a tired old argument long since discredited.

Blessings,

Ian
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
worriedmum Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #36
  • Rank:Regular Poster
  • Score:3440
  • Posts:142
  • From:Australia
  • Register:17/08/2007 9:04 PM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:07/10/2007 12:01 PMCopy HTML

Didaktikon

You did not even care to watch the video, did you? Josephus is disputed by historians. I suggest you read some historical articles before placing your argument based mainly on scriptures..    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_and_history

 

If you attribute all your problems in life to God, and everything what you achieve in life to prayers, then you deprive yourself of a merit and deny yourself a chance of finding true causes of your problems and improving your present life and lives of the people around you. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Discover true Bible http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/inconsistencies.html
Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #37
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:07/10/2007 12:15 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : worriedmum

'Mum',

You did not even care to watch the video, did you?

Nope! 'You Tube' doesn't cut it as an academically reliable source in my estimation

Josephus is disputed by historians.

Actually, what's disputed in Josephus isn't that he reports on Jesus, no, but what's become known as the Testimonium Flavium: a clearly Christian expansion of what Josephus did record. The academic standard on Josephus, the critical Greek edition published as part of the Loeb Classical Library series makes this plain. So get your facts straight, 'dearie'

I suggest you read some historical articles before placing your argument based mainly on scriptures.

Well now, I'd suggest that you clearly have absolutely no idea as to the strength of the historical basis for my arguments on this subject; and further, that you, perhaps, should limit yourself to discussing matters about which you actually do have something informed to share. Kinda drastically limits your input, though, doesn't it?

Cheerio,

Ian

P.S. Now I'm going to be quite 'blunt' for a moment. People sometimes make some pretty 'daft' claims about biblical or theological issues at this site, generally as a result of simple ignorance. But I've got to be honest, you take the category of 'stupid commentary' to a completely new level. Are you really so hell-bent intent on demonstrating to all and sundry here, that you are amazingly ignorant of the subject matter, and altogether incapable of serious research and thought?
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
worriedmum Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #38
  • Rank:Regular Poster
  • Score:3440
  • Posts:142
  • From:Australia
  • Register:17/08/2007 9:04 PM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:07/10/2007 12:41 PMCopy HTML

 'You Tube' doesn't cut it as an academically reliable source in my estimation 

And the Bible does, historically?

Is Wikipedia also not worth reading? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus


Actually, what's disputed in Josephus isn't that he reports on Jesus, no, but what's become known as the Testimonium Flavium:

What is the differnce if he mentions Jesus only in Testimonium Flavium: ?


Well now, I'd suggest that you clearly have absolutely no idea as to the strength of the historical basis for my arguments on this subject;

Correct! But you do.

 

and further, that you, perhaps, should limit yourself to discussing matters about which you actually do have something informed to share.
Yeah, don't know. Should I follow your example?

If you attribute all your problems in life to God, and everything what you achieve in life to prayers, then you deprive yourself of a merit and deny yourself a chance of finding true causes of your problems and improving your present life and lives of the people around you. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Discover true Bible http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/inconsistencies.html
Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #39
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:07/10/2007 1:24 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : worriedmum

'Mum',

Clearly I've been expecting waaaay to much from you, and more than you're capable of giving. I'll leave it at that.

Cheerio,

Ian
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
worriedmum Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #40
  • Rank:Regular Poster
  • Score:3440
  • Posts:142
  • From:Australia
  • Register:17/08/2007 9:04 PM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:07/10/2007 2:13 PMCopy HTML

Ian

Likewise...(Yawn)

If you attribute all your problems in life to God, and everything what you achieve in life to prayers, then you deprive yourself of a merit and deny yourself a chance of finding true causes of your problems and improving your present life and lives of the people around you. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Discover true Bible http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/inconsistencies.html
whodoyouthinkyouare Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #41
  • Rank:Noob
  • Score:350
  • Posts:16
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:22/02/2006 4:29 PM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:07/10/2007 8:32 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : Didaktikon

Reply to : worriedmum'Mum',You did not even care to watch the video, did you?Nope! 'You Tube' doesn't cut it as an academically reliable source in my estimationJosephus is disputed by historians.Actually, what's disputed in Josephusisn'tthat he reports on Jesus, no, but what's become known as theTestimonium Flavium: a clearly Christian expansion of what Josephusdidrecord. The academic standard on Josephus, the critical Greek edition published as part of the Loeb Classical Library series makes this plain. So get your facts straight, 'dearie'I suggest you read some historical articles before placing your argum

YouTube is but another medium for delivering information. If the bible were quoted verbatim via YouTube, would it make it any less authoritative for you? I think not. I suggest you're using folklore to prove mythology here. the Talmudic writings came much later than the alleged lifetime of Jesus. By the time they were written, Christianity was already established as a religion. You need to provide evidence that dates to the time Jesus allegedly lived. The few and brief mentions of Jesus in other historical documents should be taken with suspicion. 

Flavius Josephus (an orthodox Jew) oddly seems to rave in uncharacteristic hyperbole about how Jesus was the Messiah. Christian apologist Lee Strobel's book, "Case for Christ" suggested that the passage was subject to doctoring by later Christians and seemed to contain "interpolations".

There are a few other pieces of "corroborating evidence" that we're usually offered from Christian apologists. Sometime around the beginning of the second century, a Roman historian Tacitus apparently wrote: "Cristus... suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tibeius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus..." but Pilate was a prefect, not a procurator. Another Christian interpolation?

Sometime after 70 AD, a stoic philosopher (Mara Bar-Serapion) apparently wrote: "What advantage did the Jews gain from executing their wise king?" but the "wise king" is never named and could be anybody.  Remember that the Jews had many would-be Messiahs during the era that Jesus allegedly lived and his true story will most likely never be separated from the layers of folklore pile on top of it by desperate and clever men. 



Then there's the letter of Clement, written from Rome to the Christians of Corinth, which also was written during the (latter part of the) first century. "Them's the facts, bro'"


History is riddled with 'facts and fiction' according to who wants to sell what. The letter to Corinth was written after the supposed events and not during. The Quote you're refering to by Clement (an elder of Rome in 95 CE) was said by Eusebius to have been the fourth Bishop of Rome, however, scholars now know that numerous letters attributed to this "Clement of Rome were forged in the fourth and fifth centuries. These are also 'facts'.



Sorry, big fella, but the Church was already about 300 years old by the time Nicea was convened (325 AD)


It might actually be that Jesus never existed at all.  Suggesting this is not to say that anyone "just made up Jesus one day".  From the time of Paul to the Council of Nicaea, we have roughly 250 years for the story to grow.  This is more than sufficient time for an urban legend to develop.  Jesus' story is remarkably similar to those of Pagan gods that preceded him.  The entire religion consequently appears to be a blending of Judaism and Paganism. 

Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #42
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:07/10/2007 9:18 PMCopy HTML

WOW!  Where are all the sceptics coming from?
dogmafree Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #43
  • Rank:Poster Venti III
  • Score:9580
  • Posts:416
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:22/02/2006 12:26 AM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:07/10/2007 9:54 PMCopy HTML

From the land of reason?
"for there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so" Shakespeare (Hamlet, Act 2, Scene 2)
Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #44
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:08/10/2007 8:29 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : whodoyouthinkyouare

Good morning, bloke.

YouTube is but another medium for delivering information.

Yes. And so too are scholarly journal articles, monographs and volumes penned by serious historians. Which begs the question: did you limit yourself to 'You Tube' and 'Google' when reaching your conclusions on this subject, or did you bother to consult the writings of serious, and established, historians?

If the bible were quoted verbatim via YouTube, would it make it any less authoritative for you? I think not.

Is the Bible quoted verbatim on 'You Tube'?!

I suggest you're using folklore to prove mythology here. the Talmudic writings came much later than the alleged lifetime of Jesus. By the time they were written, Christianity was already established as a religion.

So? Your rebuttal, such as it is, suggests to me that you don't understand what the Talmud professes to be. Which then causes me to ask, have you even read it for yourself? Further, do you understand the significance of the Tannaitic portions of the Mishna? Clearly the answer to the above questions is 'no', so I'm left thinking that you've never worked with the primary materials and data for yourself, but are wholly dependent on secondary and tertiary sources. And I'd wager that the sources that you've consulted are far from being authoritative, academically. Please, 'chuck' them up so that we can have a looksie.

You need to provide evidence that dates to the time Jesus allegedly lived.

Actually, all I need to provide is evidence that supports the fact that people in the 1st century accepted that he did live. And I have. You might wish to begin with the NT writings

The few and brief mentions of Jesus in other historical documents should be taken with suspicion.

Really? Your suggestion goes completely against the findings of the recognised scholarly community (and I'm not referring to the 'religious' camp, either). Consider the following quote from the late Dr Michael Grant, by way of an 'intro':

"... if we apply to the New Testament, as we should, the same sort of criteria as we should apply to other ancient writings containing historical material, we can no more reject Jesus' existence than we can reject the existence of a mass of pagan personages whose reality as historical figures is never questioned ... To sum up, modern critical methods fail to support the Christ myth theory. It has 'again and again been answered and annihilated by first rank scholars.' In recent years, 'no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary..." M. Grant, Jesus: An Historian's Review, pp. 199-200

Flavius Josephus (an orthodox Jew) oddly seems to rave in uncharacteristic hyperbole about how Jesus was the Messiah. Christian apologist Lee Strobel's book, "Case for Christ" suggested that the passage was subject to doctoring by later Christians and seemed to contain "interpolations".

I've already broached this subject in my previous post. The Testimonium Flavium is well known to be a Christian interpolation. However, the scholarly consensus remains that the kernel around which the Christian addition was structured is authentic Josephus. I pointed you to the standard critical Greek edition of Josephus, which is part of the Loeb Classical Library series (you might be able to consult it in a good theological library). The apparatus criticus therein readily identifies the various 'layers' to the text in question, and pares away the intrusions until we are left with the text, "as 'originally' written." Now I'd be interested in discovering whether or not you consider yourself to be a competent Text Critic? If so, then grand! as we can together have many long and interesting discussions on the matter as informed equals

There are a few other pieces of "corroborating evidence" that we're usually offered from Christian apologists. Sometime around the beginning of the second century, a Roman historian Tacitus apparently wrote: "Cristus... suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tibeius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus..." but Pilate was a prefect, not a procurator. Another Christian interpolation?

Best you check your facts again, bro'. Tacitus did refer to Pilate as a 'Procurator'; the texts that we have of his 'Annals' don't stem from Christian sources. Further, had you more than a passing interest in the subject matter, you would understand that the governors of the Roman province of Judea were referred to as Praefectii ('Prefect') until Claudius named Herod Agrippa 'King of the Jews'. After his death in AD 44 (the point at which Judea reverted directly to Roman rule), the official title became 'Procurator'. I'd suggest that you get your hands on a copy of Jerry Vardaman's article, "A New Inscription Which Mentions Pilate as 'Prefect'", published in the Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol 81, No 1 (1962). It covers the ground admirably

Sometime after 70 AD, a stoic philosopher (Mara Bar-Serapion) apparently wrote: "What advantage did the Jews gain from executing their wise king?" but the "wise king" is never named and could be anybody. Remember that the Jews had many would-be Messiahs during the era that Jesus allegedly lived and his true story will most likely never be separated from the layers of folklore pile on top of it by desperate and clever men.

Ha, ha, ha.


Then there's the letter of Clement, written from Rome to the Christians of Corinth, which also was written during the (latter part of the) first century. "Them's the facts, bro'"

History is riddled with 'facts and fiction' according to who wants to sell what.

Indeed it is!

The letter to Corinth was written after the supposed events and not during.

You may recall that I said very early into this discussion, that more literature could be sourced that refers to Jesus as a real person during the first hundred years post his demise, than could be for Julius Caesar? Well, now. 'First Clement' fits the bill

The Quote you're refering to by Clement (an elder of Rome in 95 CE) was said by Eusebius to have been the fourth Bishop of Rome, however, scholars now know that numerous letters attributed to this "Clement of Rome were forged in the fourth and fifth centuries. These are also 'facts'.

Bzzzzzz! The First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians is universally attested as being authentic! It is the so-called Second Epistle of Clement, and the so-called Epistles on Virginity which were once thought to be works of his (they being anonymous in any case), but were later proven not to be so. So my point still stands, and you're shown to be seriously 'wanting in knowledge'


Sorry, big fella, but the Church was already about 300 years old by the time Nicea was convened (325 AD)

It might actually be that Jesus never existed at all. Suggesting this is not to say that anyone "just made up Jesus one day". From the time of Paul to the Council of Nicaea, we have roughly 250 years for the story to grow. This is more than sufficient time for an urban legend to develop. Jesus' story is remarkably similar to those of Pagan gods that preceded him. The entire religion consequently appears to be a blending of Judaism and Paganism.

Yes, you've mentioned as much a few times now, but have been unable to provide a shred of evidence to support the assertion. So please allow me to summarise as I see matters: 1. the view that you've put forward on this subject goes against the facts as firmly established (and supported) by scholarly consensus (both secular and religious). 2. You've failed to grapple adequately with the testimony given in the primary source materials; it's clear you've little personal familiarity with much of it. 3. Your attempts to introduce supposition loosely based on certain primary sources demonstrates that you're not sufficiently informed concerning the history of said sources, or of the scholarly enquiries undertaken into the same. In short, WDYTYA, yours presents as nothing more than a hopefully tendentious and philosophically-motivated position, but one which stands completely at variance with the overwhelming facts.

Have you anything more on the subject to add?

Blessings,

Ian
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #45
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:08/10/2007 8:40 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : brolga

Good morning, Ralph.

WOW! Where are all the sceptics coming from?

People who are sceptical of the religious claims of Jesus are fine, given that such is a faith issue. However, people who try to intimate that Jesus never existed aren't sceptics. They're simply ignorants who need considerably more faith than the Christians they oppose, given that they have to believe against the evidence!

Blessings,

Ian
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
RF_on_the_edge Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #46
  • Rank:Regular Poster
  • Score:3180
  • Posts:156
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:12/03/2007 10:25 PM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:08/10/2007 9:10 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : brolga

WOW! Where are all the sceptics coming from?

Personally I love it when posts such as those from WDYTYA are made. A little research shows those arguments as quite refutable and helps prepare the Christians amongst us for reasonable (read 'rational') 'defense of the gospel'. (I love the 'net too!) Here are some examples.

Josephus' comment was referenced by Ian to demonstrate that there was a historical person Jesus whom we call 'the Christ'. The dispute WDTYTA refers solely to whether words were added which indicated that Josephus himself may have considered him Messiah. (All as Ian himself wrote!) That dispute is irrelevant to Ian's argument that Jospehus attests to JC's historicity.

There are reasonable responses to the allegation that Tacitus' comment is a Christian interpolation (acknowledged I believe by at least one skeptics organisation), and we can note that prior to the discovery of the inscription in question that some skeptics even publicly questioned whether Pilate existed. (No mention of backpedalling on that issue.)

The argument used by WDYTYA regarding the validity of Clement's testimony is flawed. I believe there are undisputed letters from the man. WDYTYA doesn't even tell us whether he thinks Ian's reference is from an undisputed Clement or a pseudo-Clement. His post was knid of like the mud throwing exercise that our Aussie politicians tend to indulge in. I'm presuming that s/he isn't doing it deliberately. 

<snipped in view of Ian's response>

I'm still looking forward to how WDYTYA responds to, "Do you know, it's actually quite ironic, but there's more that was written about Jesus from within one hundred years of his life and death, then there was about Julius Caesar! Care to posit that he never existed?" I haven't heard the skeptics' spin on that one yet.

worriedmum Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #47
  • Rank:Regular Poster
  • Score:3440
  • Posts:142
  • From:Australia
  • Register:17/08/2007 9:04 PM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:08/10/2007 5:30 PMCopy HTML

Ian, RF on the edge. I am a sorry guys, (I am trying to watch my tongue), you could at least look up something on the internet, before you write something like "but there's more that was written about Jesus from within one hundred years of his life and death, then there was about Julius Caesar!"

Actually, Julius Caesar wrote his memoirs about civil war and Gallic war, apart from numerous writings of others authors. Jesus wrote nothing!  On the other hand, Josephus is a very controversial figure in history. He was a traitor and historians dispute his writings. Even if Clement existed he was a Christian priest and he did not live in the time of Christ,  so his literature is as reliable as yours.

 

The view that you've put forward on this subject goes against the facts as firmly established (and supported) by scholarly consensus (both secular and religious).

Religious may be, but not "wordly"

 

did you limit yourself to 'You Tube' and 'Google' when reaching your conclusions on this subject, or did you bother to consult the writings of serious, and established, historians?

Did you limit yourself to the bible and theological books when reaching the conclusion on this subjest and did you bother to consult the writings of serious, and established, historians? Ah, I think we can gues what the truth is.

 

P.S. Now I'm going to be quite 'blunt' for a moment. People sometimes make some pretty 'daft' claims about biblical or theological issues at this site, generally as a result of simple ignorance. But I've got to be honest, you take the category of 'stupid commentary' to a completely new level. Are you really so hell-bent intent on demonstrating to all and sundry here, that you are amazingly ignorant of the subject matter, and altogether incapable of serious research and thought

Is this is how you normally talk to people who don't share your point of view?  Shall I call you stupid, arrogant, ignorant, power hungry bigot? May be you are an American spy? And then we will continue to discuss our personalities, or will you answer our questions, if you reckon you have a load of knowledge to share, and we debate it as the civil people?

 

Back to the evidence of Jesus' existence. There was no evidence of his miracles in history, apart from the bible. There is no evidence that he resurrected! BTW I saw somewhere was written on the forum by Ian, you don't need evidence anyway, your religion is based on faith not evidence. It is enough for you to read someone's' book about Jesus existence to have faith. That is why I have asked you before; do you believe in aliens as well? Because they will come at the end of the world and they will save us. They will save only good people. Also, don't forget to believe in Santa; otherwise he won't bring you Christmas presents.

 

If you attribute all your problems in life to God, and everything what you achieve in life to prayers, then you deprive yourself of a merit and deny yourself a chance of finding true causes of your problems and improving your present life and lives of the people around you. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Discover true Bible http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/inconsistencies.html
MothandRust Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #48
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:41380
  • Posts:1877
  • From:Australia
  • Register:27/02/2004 11:21 PM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:08/10/2007 6:07 PMCopy HTML

Reply to : Didaktikon

Is the Bible quoted verbatim on 'You Tube'?!

I see what you're getting at, YouTube is a bit of a melting pot for any old crackpot, but of course it is quoted verbatim on youtube... maybe not all of it, but there are many YouTube video subscriptions that are visualising bible scriptures to video. Be ye no longer ignorant of the possibilities of YouTube. - ha. Here is thou, the Bible quoted word for word on this moder video papyrus...

You can much of the bible on YouTube http://www.youtube.com/user/audioBible and so on and so on. Part 1 of 7, Proverbs 12-31, KJV audio Bible video. Heck, there's even some dedicated guy who's slowly rebuilding scenes in animated Lego narrated by verbatim scripture.

    


 
[LINK SiteName=Mothrust: Movies and Modern Myth Target=_blank]http://aintchristian.blogspot.com.au/[/LINK] Be nice, for everyone that you meet is fighting a harder battle - Anita Roddick
Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #49
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:09/10/2007 9:14 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : worriedmum

'Mum',

I won't say that you're stupid, but this latest response of yours certainly is! Go back and read what I actually wrote, and then have a look at how you've interpreted the same

Sheesh!

Ian
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
franks ghost Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #50
  • Rank:Poster Venti I
  • Score:6310
  • Posts:302
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:04/02/2007 9:55 AM

Re:Recommended reading No1 The Bible

Date Posted:09/10/2007 10:58 AMCopy HTML

Reply to : MothandRust

Reply to : DidaktikonIs the Bible quoted verbatim on 'You Tube'?!I see what you're getting at, YouTube is a bit of a meltingpot for any old crackpot,but of course it is quoted verbatim on youtube... maybe not all of it, but there are many YouTube video subscriptions that are visualising bible scriptures to video.Be ye no longer ignorant of the possibilities of YouTube. - ha.Here is thou, the Bible quoted word for word on this moder video papyrus...You canmuch of the bibleon YouTubehttp://www.youtube.com/user/audioBible

Thanks Moth.

FG

it is the glory of God to conceal a matter but the honour of kings to search it out.
RCI prophesies
Copyright © 2000-2019 Aimoo Free Forum All rights reserved.