From: Jim Eisele (jeisele@starpower.net)
Date: Tue Nov 05 2002 - 15:07:35 EST
In response to Blake,
>Define false prophet.
Someone who predicts the end of the world (like so many others
have) and it doesn't come true.
>What in Christ's life and recorded statements do you
>find false, exactly?
Since you asked, I also have a problem with Christianity being
the means to get to heaven (if there was such a thing as heaven).
Some guy appears in history and you have to believe he is the
Son of God to get to heaven. There just has got to be a better
way. The whole concept is clumsy. When you add the (now becoming
more obvious to me) errors in the Bible, Christianity appears more
and more mortal by the moment. When you consider the outrageous
demands of Christianity (believing in hell, to name only one) it
becomes clearer that Christianity is human manipulation of fellow
humans.
>>>did he rise agian etc?
>>No, but I guess that gives people false hope.
>On what evidence do you believe this to be true? The
>documentary evidence says that He did.
What evidence? A true God would get the facts straight in His
book. Now if you want to make a case for a semi-truthful God,
I may grant you some evidence. But I could show you Bible verses
to refute that position. Remember, the NT was written WELL AFTER
Jesus' death. They could have written anything they wanted to.
Too bad they still thought Jesus was returning soon when the "pen
got put to paper." The hoax would have been so much more effective
without that destructive detail.
Maybe there is a God, after all. I am now beginning to see that
there is enough evidence to falsify Christianity. Also, it would be
very nice if you provided a "for instance" example of evidence if you
are going to claim that someone rose from the dead. In my posts I have
provided several reasons that cast doubt on the notion that a true God
was behind the story of the Hebrews and a guy named Jesus.
>Christianity is one belief system that has withstood,
>intact, thousands of years of social, political,
>economic and religious or anti-religious attacks. I
>would defy you to produce a system of belief and
>understanding that encompasses so much data (about the
>nature of the world, human nature, etc) and has
>survived so robustly.
Christianity is an example of the evolution of religious
thought. It does make much more sense to "worship a
Creator" than the moon. Now we have more knowledge.
We don't need religion as much. And, this knowledge is
taking over religion.
Things once attributed to God and demons are now regarded
as silly superstitions. If you are looking for a robust
belief system, look no farther than look out for
#1 (yourself). That's part of why Christianity is successful.
People don't want to risk hell or miss out on heaven.
I wouldn't consider such people to be true believers.
But, such claims give the church power over the ignorant and
the fearful. Human manipulation.
For one example, I am starting to read how Eusebius
(early church leader) justified misleading people for the
church. Also, Christianity is very similar to pagan religions
that were in existence at that time. How could any fair God
expect us to believe in light of all of this counter-evidence?
>The creation account is only false, if it is at all,
>according to your narrow, naive reading of Genesis.
Maybe you are having a bad day, Blake. Or, you think God
is a hopeless weakling or an intentional deceiver. Thank
goodness for agnosticism! How hard would it have been for
an omnipotent God to keep all of the six days claims out of
Genesis !?! God is not behind the Bible. Humans wrote the
Bible and claimed divine inspiration. How convenient. And,
I am now beginning to see, how predictable. Everyone made
outrageous God claims back then.
>The same is true regarding Jesus' prophetic
>statements. And, contrary to your belief, this is not
>simply a matter of trying to twist the words to mean
>something than they actually mean. Read a bit of
>Wittgenstein for the problems with language, and then
>we can start to talk about your pseudo problems.
Blake, your "God" is an intentional deceiver. If
Christians stopped throwing their minds away, there'd be a
lot less Christians. Jesus, throughout the NT, was expected
back SOON. You'll have to do much better than refer me
to a book without at least taking a stab at the passages in
question.
>Please try to do the logical thing and go out and read
>a reasonable collection of atheists, theists and
>agnostics and think critically about the issues.
>Nothing you have written thus far demonstrates that
>you are really thinking critically. You appear to be
>accepting one set of naive beliefs for another.
Expecting the Bible to be true before I try to follow an
invisible God with outrageous requirements. How naive.
Sign me up for my enlightened lobotomy.
Jim Eisele
Genesis in Question
http://genesisinquestion.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Nov 08 2002 - 20:33:26 EST