Why Didn't Jesus Write The Bible?

reply to post by pplrnuts

The defenders of the faith so far are at a level that I honestly would feel is elementary brainwashed Christianity, and worthy of no replies. I am honestly snickering at everyone of them so far. I will keep re-visiting for signs of intelligence though.

I was wondering what happened to you. I'm glad that I've been able to provide some entertainment for you.

reply to post by liveandletlive

How do you give someone a star?

There should be a little star outline next to the persons avatar. Just click on that and it will give the person a star.

reply to post by octotom



I just stared your post. Why? Because you are clearly a graduate from a seminary or other in-depth religious studies. Most of the people whom I argue with on here can't put two words together and only know what they learned on Sunday in Church, and I respect someone who knows their stuff, even if we view history with a little bit of a different spin.

To me again, "weeding out heretics". Who's a heretic? Is the heretic to the Romans or the predominant early Christian church a heretic unto Jesus or unto themselves or their friends?

The people in control decide what "truth" is. That was my only point and aside from that I'll concede I am out of my league arguing with someone who is a Christian history or theology major. If you are this well read on your own then I give you huge credit, because you know your details.

Doesn't mean we agree on the spin, but the details are written in the annals of history for all to see.

My background consists of eight years of catholic school, additional reading I have done, four classes in the study of the bible as literature and one in early Christian thought and writings (in university).
Since then I have studied world religions as a hobby and continue to learn anything I can about Christianity to this day. I was not educated by dan brown as many are.


[edit on 8-3-2010 by JonInMichigan]

I will keep re-visiting for signs of intelligence though.

reply to post by pplrnuts


Sigh.

There you go again. Claiming to have all this knowledge, yet not sharing it. And yet you're surprised at the lack of intelligent conversation on your topic?

The topic you picked is a huge one, and certainly can't be addressed adequately UNLESS you set parameters. Which you did not do. You simply assumed your readers would figure out your parameters and abide by them. Yeah, that's smart....

Seems to me that the folks who continued on with the discussion were doing just fine without your input or hostility.

I might get censored for this but it must be said.

The OP author is still doing nothing more than religious sniping and has still yet to offer anything of use to this debate.

"I'm snickering at ...." blah blah blah whatever he said. Is that you best he can come up with?

I bet you are snickering, just sitting there in your mother's basement eating the cheesy poofs she just brought you. Although I agreed with your original premise, I bet I can guess that you got your ideas from Zeitgeist. Examination of your post makes that kind of obvious. So you watched an online video and now you are an expert?! laughable.

Even I can't site as much detail as a well educated religious historian, but I can have an opinion which is that history is always painted by the victor of the battle. Everyone else becomes, heretics, forgers, terrorists, and barbarians.


[edit on 8-3-2010 by JonInMichigan]

damn - another double post - please delete. Why is that happening?

[edit on 8-3-2010 by JonInMichigan]

reply to post by octotom


I have provided you a list of contridictions I found after a quick search. Im not interested in you defending them, but its an example of how confusing the bible can be. God is not the author of confusion. We should be able to reasonably undersand something that comes from Him. It goes without saying that if He is teaching us His will, we need to be able to comprehend it.

1) King Soloman's temple had two thousand (1 KINGS 7:26) or three thousand (2 CHRONICLES 4:5) baths?

2) Was John the Baptist Elijah as Jesus claimed (MATTHEW 17:11-13) or not (JOHN 1:19-21)?

3) Was Jesus the only one to ascend to Heaven (JOHN 3:13) or not (2 KINGS 2:11)?

4) Did the whole world have one language (GENESIS 11:1) or many (GENESIS 10:31)?

5) Were some of the worlds animals saved during the flood (GENESIS 9:9-10) or did God destroy all living creatures (GENESIS 8:21)?

6) How can God smell (GENESIS 8:21) if He is not a physical being? Why did God have to come down from Heaven to see the tower of Babel (GENESIS 11:5)? How could Jacob (Isreal) wrestle with God (GENESIS 32:22-30)?

7) Can we see the Father (God) as Jesus claims (JOHN 14:9) or not, as Jesus claims (JOHN 5:37, MATTHEW 6:6)?

8) Was Jesus betrayed with a kiss (MATTHEW 26:49) or not (LUKE 22:47-48)?

9) After witnessing Jesus' crucifixion, did the centurion call Jesus a 'righteous man' (LUKE 23:47) or the 'son of God' (MATTHEW 27:54)?

10) If Jesus is God, can he be tempted (MARK 1:12) or not (JAMES 1:13)?

11) Does God (2 SAMUEL 24:1) or Satan (1 CHRONICLES 21:1) incite David to conduct the census of his people?

12) Was the total population of Israel 800,000 (2 SAMUEL 24:9)or 1,100,000 (1 CHRONICLES 21:5)?

13) Was the total number of fighting men in Judah 500,000 (2 SAMUEL 24:9) or 470,000 (1 CHRONICLES 21:5)?

14) Were there seven years of famine (2 SAMUEL 24:13) or three (1 CHRONICLES 21:12)?

15) Was Ahaziah 22 (2 KINGS 8:26) or 42 (2 CHRONICLES 22:2) when he began to rule over Jerusalem?

16) Was Jehoiachin 18 years old (2 KINGS 24:8) or 8 years old (2 CHRONICLES 36:9) when he became king of Jerusalem?

17) Did king Jehoiachin rule over Jerusalem for 3 months (2 KINGS 24:8) or 3 months and 10 days (2 CHRONICLES 36:9)?

18) Did the chief of the mighty of David lift up his spear and kill 800 (2 SAMUEL 23:8) or only 300 men (1 CHRONICLES 11:11)?

19) Was Noah to bring 2 pairs of ALL living creatures (GENESIS 6:19-20) or 7 pairs of 'clean' and 2 pairs of 'unclean' (GENESIS 7:2)?

20) Did David capture 1,700 of King Zobah's horsemen (2 SAMUEL 8:4) or 7,000 (1 CHRONICLES 18:4)?

21) Did Solomon have 40,000 stalls for his horses (1 KINGS 4:26) or only 4,000 stalls (2 CHRONICLES 9:25)?

21) Did Baasha, the king of Israel, die in the 26th year of King Asa's reign (1 KINGS 15:33) or was he still alive in the 36th year (2 CHRONICLES 16:1)?

22) Did Solomon appoint 3,600 overseers (2 CHRONICLES 2:2) for the work of building the temple, or was it only 3,300 (1 KINGS 5:16)?

23) Both EZRA 2:64 and NEHEMIAH 7:66 agree that the totals for the whole assembly was 42,360. Yet when the totals are added, EZRA has 29,818 and NEHEMIAH has 31,089.

24) Did 200 singers (EZRA 2:65) or 245 singers (NEHEMIAH 7:67) accompany the assembly?

25) Was Jacob (MATTHEW 1:16) or Heli (LUKE 3:23) the father of Joseph?

26) Did Jesus descend from Solomon (MATTHEW 1:6) or from Nathan (LUKE 3:31)?

27) Was Joram (MATTHEW 1:8) or Amaziah (2 CHRONICLES 26:1) the father of Uzziah?

28) Was Josiah (MATTHEW 1:11) or Jehoiakim (1 CHRONICLES 3:16) the father of Jechoniah?

29) Were there 14 (MATTHEW 1:17 or 13 (MATTHEW 1:12-16) generations from the Babylonian exile until Jesus?

30) Who was the father of Shelah; Cainan (LUKE 3:35-36) or Arphaxad (GENESIS 11:12)?

31) Simon Peter finds out that Jesus was the Christ by a revelation from heaven (MATTEW 16:17) or by his brother Andrew (JOHN 1:41)?

32) When Jesus met Jairus, his daughter was already dead (MATTHEW 9:18), or was dying (MARK 5:23)?

33) Jesus allowed (MARK 6:8) or did not allow (MATTHEW 10:9) his disciples to keep a staff on their journey?

34) John the Baptist did (MATTHEW 3:13-14) or did not (JOHN 1:32-33) recognize Jesus BEFORE his baptism?

35) John the Baptist did (JOHN 1:32-33) or did not (MATTHEW 11:2) recognize Jesus AFTER his baptism? SIDENOTE; Is it the least bit odd that Jesus (God) was baptized?

36) When Jesus testifies about himself it is valid (JOHN 8:14), is not (JOHN 5:31) valid?

37) When Jesus curses the fig tree, did it wither at once (MATTHEW 21:19) or overnight (MARK 11:20)? SIDENOTE: Why would Jesus curse and kill a tree just because it didn't have fruit? Is that patience?

38) Jesus said "Blessed are you who hunger now, for you will be satisfied (LUKE 6:21)" and "not to worry because life is more than food (LUKE 12:22-23)", yet he curses a fig tree because he is hungry and it has no fruit (MATTHEW 21:19).

39) Jesus is sent (LUKE 6:27) is not sent to teach peace and love (LUKE 12:49-53).

40) Did Peter deny Jesus 3 times before the cock crowed (JOHN 13:38), or 3 times before the cock crowed twice (MARK 14:30)?

41) Jesus did (JOHN 19:17) or did not (MARK 15:21) bear his own cross?

reply to post by pplrnuts


Assuming Jesus and God are perfect etc, as your hypothetical does you should ask them not us.

Use your critical thinking skills? Think about it!

Jesus possibly suffered from 'Carpenter's Thumb.' It was and still is an occupational hazard. As an ex-carpenter...I can attest to the impossibility of writing after banging your thumb with the hammer.

On top of that, how many celebrities today write their own press releases? Messiahs are hardly likely to be conducting their own press campaigns...they have people for that stuff.

Oh! The thumb...it hurts so much. Oh! Will I never finish my autobiography?

John 2:23 Chapter 12
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/4c332882a9de.jpg[/atsimg]

Thumb guard for carpenters....2000 years too late.



[edit on 8-3-2010 by Kandinsky]

reply to post by JonInMichigan

I just stared your post.

Hey, thanks, man. The stars and applause are way more meaningful when they come from someone that I don't necessarily agree with.

Because you are clearly a graduate from a seminary or other in-depth religious studies.

A seminary graduate I am not! I actually only have "officially" two years of Bible college. I do study a lot though here in my free time.

The people in control decide what "truth" is.

I'll agree with you in this point. There are some that "control" what truth is. There is something unique about the early church though. Let's say that you and I had a really good mutual friend who died. After his death, you and I most likely would start telling stories about the memories that we had with him. This would solidify in our minds the remembrance of our friend. So, if someone came along and tried to claim something different about him, we could call that person out because we know how our friend was. That is similar with the early church. Jesus' followers had spent a lot of time with him. After his death, his followers undoubtedly retold things that Jesus had said. This would have ingrained in their minds Jesus' teachings. They in turn would have passed this along to people. This would have then later been written down and so on.

Then the early church spread across the Near East and Asia Minor. So, many people would have been exposed to Jesus' teachings through the apostles and so on. Fast forward to the councils. Due to the teachings of Jesus that would've been passed on from his followers, it would have been relatively easy to pick out though who had distorted the faith. It wasn't a matter of trying to "control" the truth. Instead, removing those from fellowship that had a view of Jesus that didn't match up with the teachings of the apostles.

reply to post by liveandletlive


lame excuse at bigotry. things like "did the tree whither instantly or overnight" bears nothing on the essence and teachings of christianity. and ofcourse the different gospels give differing accounts, haha, thats why there are 4 dood. duh. especially the synoptics and john and the diferences between the material in mark and the material in the missing gospel (or sayings text). anyone who's faith is challenged by you pointing out contradictions (which are almost universally acknowledged by the churches themselves) made by different human authors, writing about the same events at different times for different audiences didn't really believe in the first place. so congratulations at accomplishign nothing

Originally posted by pplrnuts
The lack of links and sources was an intention of mine to keep away from a thread of bickering the validity, or bias of authors, scholars, researchers, etc. It was intended for the topic to stay on the subject matter. Its another remedial aspect that I would assume anyone involving themselves of such a question would already know.

That's just plain stupid. The validity of sources would be a part of the subject matter. Your attempt to prevent the thread from being derailed ended up causing a much larger derailment! Can you learn a lesson from this? That what you consider "remedial" is actually essential to the whole problem? BTW... You keep using that word, but I don't think you know what it means.

I can honestly say that the counter argument and views from the defenders of the christian cult are accurately of an elementary level thus far. Perhaps I would have been wiser to have posted on a more advanced forum of theology elsewhere. The defenders of the faith so far are at a level that I honestly would feel is elementary brainwashed Christianity, and worthy of no replies. I am honestly snickering at everyone of them so far. I will keep re-visiting for signs of intelligence though.

There have been some elementary level counters; but most of them have actually been complex, especially the one you said "don't make me a joke" in response to. If they're so elementary, deal with them. If you can't beat the elementary counter-arguments, you have failed as a debater. If you can shoot down the elementary arguments, smarter people will come and deal with more hardcore issues.

Also: stop assuming that just because people disagree with you they are members of the Christian Cult. I actually agree with you, but I absolutely abhor the way you're arguing and want to help you refine your argument so that it, you know, actually achieves something.

Also also: What is up with the red? That's just annoying, I think.

-----------

JoninMichigan, Octotom: You two are rocking this topic. I am seriously enjoying the debate between you guys.

Octotom: I only used the SAB as a starting point for the contradictions I know for a fact that there are a few that haven't been resolved, but I don't know which ones they are and so forth. You're clearly, as Jon said, a student of this stuff.

Originally posted by octotom
reply to post by liveandletlive

 

How do you give someone a star?

There should be a little star outline next to the persons avatar. Just click on that and it will give the person a star.

Thank you for the information. You are too kind. Let me see if it works. Yep, star for you.

Originally posted by reptoidsonice
reply to post by liveandletlive

 

lame excuse at bigotry. things like "did the tree whither instantly or overnight" bears nothing on the essence and teachings of christianity. and ofcourse the different gospels give differing accounts, haha, thats why there are 4 dood. duh. especially the synoptics and john and the diferences between the material in mark and the material in the missing gospel (or sayings text). anyone who's faith is challenged by you pointing out contradictions (which are almost universally acknowledged by the churches themselves) made by different human authors, writing about the same events at different times for different audiences didn't really believe in the first place. so congratulations at accomplishign nothing

That was very Christian of you! First, the point I was making is that the bible is confusing and it shouldn’t be. Why would god hold someone accountable based on an interpretation of a “divine” document created and manipulated by men? Second, your a prime example of why "Christians" rather than Christianity are such a turn off. Good job!


Ps: Im not here to "challenge" anyones belief. I thought I might learn something. and I did, now I know your an a$$. Mission accomplished!

[edit on 8-3-2010 by liveandletlive]

I am willing to wager that 100% of corporate memos are not penned by the CEO, but by his secretary. Who cares? It's the authority behind it that matters.

It is kind of an interesting point, though. Jesus's Passover meeting at the Temple with the teachers there suggests that Jesus was relatively well-educated. So he probably could write. But you never have a mention in the Gospels that Jesus actually did any writing. Nobody says, "I went into Jesus's tent, where he was writing by candlelight, and he put his book aside and answered my question."

That would be a nice little find, wouldn't it? The Gospel of Jesus in his own handwriting? Not that you could prove it, of course.

Well, maybe someday somebody will find a copy of it buried in some hole in the desert. You never know. There's all kinds of stuff still buried away.

quote]Originally posted by octotom
reply to post by JonInMichigan

The people in control decide what "truth" is.

I'll agree with you in this point. There are some that "control" what truth is. There is something unique about the early church though. Let's say that you and I had a really good mutual friend who died. After his death, you and I most likely would start telling stories about the memories that we had with him. This would solidify in our minds the remembrance of our friend. So, if someone came along and tried to claim something different about him, we could call that person out because we know how our friend was. That is similar with the early church. Jesus' followers had spent a lot of time with him. After his death, his followers undoubtedly retold things that Jesus had said. This would have ingrained in their minds Jesus' teachings. They in turn would have passed this along to people. This would have then later been written down and so on.

Then the early church spread across the Near East and Asia Minor. So, many people would have been exposed to Jesus' teachings through the apostles and so on. Fast forward to the councils. Due to the teachings of Jesus that would've been passed on from his followers, it would have been relatively easy to pick out though who had distorted the faith. It wasn't a matter of trying to "control" the truth. Instead, removing those from fellowship that had a view of Jesus that didn't match up with the teachings of the apostles.

Hmmm... I need to think about that. You make a really good point.
I guess I have always had a problem with the delays in the whole process.

Jesus lives from 0 or 4ad or whatever to approximately 33-37ad. I think, and I’m just going off of memory here, that the 4 scriptures where written 60ad - 110ad or something like that. Quite a delay after J.C.’s dealth. Plus, the apostles were really nervous about what had happened to their leader and others such as John the Baptist. To sell their new religious view they may have had to embellish at times and downplay in others. They may – and I stress may – have had to paint Jesus a certain way at times which can lead to some errors as to what he was really about. I don’t know and no one really does. It’s a faith thing, and I guess I have largely lost mine.

Then Paul comes in, never even meeting Jesus, and muddies the waters (for me anyway) by jumping on board and steering the ship. I would have preferred that Paul never got involved. I know that Jesus said that Peter was the rock on which his church would be built. Jesus never talked of some future leader who would come along and offer a heck of a lot of guidance (and fundamentalist dogma with the immanent end of the world they believed was at hand) which is the most commonly sited works in the bible.

When I read the scriptures, Jesus was like the ticked off hippie and a Judaism reformer, more so than he was a new church starter (like Paul). We have to fast forward a full 200 years from Paul to get to the point where the Romans and Early Christians are involved in the process of creating the church of today.

If what you say is correct, then so be it, the bible might just be an honest account. (The scriptures that is, I still refuse to acknowledge Paul as being the answer man. Again, a faith issue.) But when I look at the revisionist history just within my own lifetime (41 years), I am staggered at how history has been rewritten with all sorts of different political spins that completely change the flavor and rational behind recent events.

Honestly, in just the last two years, I have seen politicians say more things out of both sides of their mouths then I can count, and they seem to forget history on a daily basis. (Didn’t the democratically controlled congress vote for the war, or was it just a Clinton look-alike sitting in the Senate? And if they had bad info, then didn’t GW also have bad info?) It’s all spin!

Not so long ago I remember watching Michael Jackson being heralded as one of the greatest people of the century. Before he died, my kids (11 and 12) would tell me that kids at school would call any older person who seemed like a creepy pedophile type a "michael jackson". They would also say it to each other as an insult, the way we threw the term “gay” around as a kid. Jackson dies, the media goes goo-goo for him, and next thing you know my kids want to watch Michael Jackson videos and emulate him. In two short weeks he went from a creepy pervert to super rock legend again.... through spin.

If I had a time machine, I would like to go back and meet the real Jesus. I WANT TO KNOW WHAT IS SPIN AND WHAT IS REAL! To say there is likely no spin, gives me pause. They were just as political back then as we are today and we all know how pivotal Jesus’ followers were to the fabric of the time. He was a dissident and a rabble rouser. Any manner of spin was possible in the 200 years between his life and this book so many call infallible.

We have been talking New Testament, going back to the Old Testament; it was not solely an original work as seem to have been in the making since all of antiquity. I see plenty of evidence that the genesis story is repeated by many cultures in different forms, which is the OP’s point really. It is completely different from the New Testament in flavor and in history.

I kindof like that oldest part of the bible, and I agree with how Jesus tried to fix his church (Judism). I’m just not a huge fan of either Moses, nor Paul as I believe they recreated the problems with their respective churches. Seems like Paul reintroduced the elements that Jesus set out to destroy. But that is an opinion coming from a Neo-Pagan (me) so what do you expect. To me, Jesus was philosophically a hippie and shaman who couldn’t understand where the spirituality was in religion as a business or an excuse for war. I can totally get behind that!


[edit on 8-3-2010 by JonInMichigan]

reply to post by pplrnuts


NO because Jesus wasn't the last prophet. Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) was the last prophet not Jesus.

i only read the first few posts and had to repsond to the OP

ARE YOU SERIOUS DUDE?

nice job showing your complete lack of knowledge of the bible..you want to know why jesus did not write something that was completed hundreds and maybe a thousand years before he was born?

like are you kidding...and if he wrote the NT..or hell if he came during the OT times and wrote it..it would make the bible no more special than anything else..

all other major religions are written by one or a few people..

the bible is 66 books by 40 people many of whom never met over thousands of years..

reply to post by CanadianDream420


And you don't have enough evidence to post a reply like that.

I don't know about you, but I wasn't there at the time so I can't say definitivly what happened.

As for faith that it happened? I have faith that my child will do good in life.......I have faith that my wife won't cheat on me.......with regards to my soul? Sorry, some things I just can't take on faith and that's one of them. I take my spiritual well being a little more seriously then that.



Peace