first for one thing Jesus is the Law, the maker of Law. The words from the Old Testament is through man's interpretation of the spirit of God to build a bridge to God to create a covenant
between God and man. Jesus is the real deal , there is no interpretation , the words are Jesus. If Jesus is saying love thy father as thyself there is no ambiguity here. Love each each and everyone as yourself , no ambiguity. Take the words of the New Testament because those are the words that make the law. As far as changing law Jesus explained to the priests that the Sabbath is holy , but who would leave a calf to die if it needed help. What sense would it make for Jesus to be arguing or even to be crucified through the provocation of the Jewish Priests if he spoke of their interpretation of the law or even of the Old Testaments interpretation which was their interpretation of the Old Testament.. He wouldn't as well they the priests would of had no  problem with either's teaching which obviously was not the case.

Quote from: stephaniec on June 04, 2016, 01:30:15 PM
first for one thing Jesus is the Law, the maker of Law. The words from the Old Testament is through man's interpretation of the spirit of God to build a bridge to God to create a covenant
between God and man. Jesus is the real deal , there is no interpretation , the words are Jesus.

I am not attacking your faith.  I am explaining why my faith is gone.  So,

If you mean the Old Testament is simply the uninspired writings of men and therefore not a reliable witness of God then I agree.

The words of Jesus were written by anonymous authors not earlier than 40 years after he died.  Other than that there is exactly zero primary source material that Jesus even existed, much less spoke those words.

The earliest writings were Paul's which contain no words of Jesus at all but rather convey Paul's theology.

The Bible I used to believe says, in Jesus' words,
Mark 11:24. Therefore I say unto you, What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them.

Plenty of us here have prayed for decades to be healed.  Exactly zero of those prayers was ever answered. So, either these are in fact not God's words, or they are God's words and are untrue.  Either way, if these words of God are untrue then what possible reason is there to believe, absent any primary sources, that any of the rest of it is a reliable witness and not just the writings of 1st Century religious zealots looking to expand their following?  Especially what possible reason is there to believe when this living God, after being written about decades after his ascension by anonymous authors, hasn't made a single appearance to anyone else in 2000 years?

Yes, I am angry at myself for ever putting any faith at all in the empty words recorded in the New Testament.   And I am angry that we are continually called mentally ill deviants by "Bible believing Christians".

But if you can find comfort in it then I'm happy for you.  All I find in it for myself anymore is betrayal and empty promises.




Sapere Aude

Stephanie, I understand what you are asking. I taught gospel doctrine for many years. The inconsistencies in the holy writ drove me nuts and eventually convinced me to seek another path.

However, with that said, I don't think what you are observing is a result of people studying the Bible. In our current society people spout a lot of hatred and justify it by quoting from the Bible. The verse and meaning have little weight with those who have not studied or care to read the scriptures. They see living examples and don't like what they see.

Those of us who are on the fringes of society (specifically us trans folk here but it applies to other minorities) view church and political leaders preach hatred and motivate their followers to violent action. At the minimum they are quite successful in marginalizing us. What we see in response is a backlash against organized religion and these leaders. By extension, many who are driven away will apply the actions they see to Jesus.

"By their acts ye shall know them." Please don't ask me to look it up... but it does apply here. People don't like the taste and therefore they will not drink (me).

The second issue I see which gets little attention is that religion seems to be intractable and can not change with the times. I believe that many people see complete denial of some aspects of scientific endeavor yet readily suck up others. "Thank God for saving his life" comes to mind while not giving due credit to the surgeon, for example. Here again, the observer shakes his/her head in wonderment at the denial of simple and obvious fact that a doctor, a student of science has been the primary instrument in saving a life. Climate change denial is a huge motivator for those who disagree with the religious movement. Again, by extension, this gets laid squarely in Jesus' lap. There are many other commonplace things that people can see. They have personal evidence which drives them away.

Thirdly, we instinctively understand that religion had basic functions in the beginning. It was used to govern and to attempt to explain our existence. We now have a government sort of ruled by the people in most countries around the world so we have no need for the governance part of the holy texts. The explanation of our being in the scriptures is also being explained away by scientific discovery. The facts of science are in direct contradiction to the simplistic descriptions of the Bible. I think by now, most people know where the rain comes from. Again, by extension, Jesus is the recipient of these objections.

The fourth point I want to make is this: There is no other evidence than the Bible that Jesus actually lived. The gospels were written decades after the death of Jesus from oral accounts. As an example of where I'm going with this is this: can you give me an accurate accounting of the Cuban missile crisis without looking it up? Or as another example... how many people believe in UFO's?  The primary qualification of the Bible's authors was that they could read and write. This was not a common talent. People don't think about this much but have an inherent belief that the events in the Bible could not have happened the way they have been taught. "It was a long time ago and what did they know?"

Number five: When we look at other cultures and see how they are behaving in the middle east we are looking directly at how Christianity behaved 700 years ago. Again, people don't understand this to any great degree but they feel it. They sort of get it.

Yes, many of the teachings of Jesus as presented in the Bible are definitely worth living. But they are contained only in the four gospels. And... the four gospels contradict each other in many places. Again, most people don't have an understanding of these conflicts but ask any biblical scholar... they know.

For me, I do endeavor to live much of what "Jesus taught." Those are the beliefs I grew up with. I find these to be everlasting concepts and just a decent way to live. However, I don't need Jesus to live a good life by these principles. This may be a revelation to many non obedient... but they too feel similarly without being able to verbalize it. The best "Christians" I know are atheists. They don't need the fear of God and sin to motivate them to do the right thing. They just see it as the best way to live.

These are just some observations and my opinions to answer your questions. They are free and worth every penny.

Matt 7:16-20. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.


Sapere Aude

These are the words I take from the Old Testament and really nothing more that I incorporate into my everyday thought process. My value in the scripture lies entirely in the New Testament.    "Isaiah 9:2King James Version (KJV)

2 The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light: they that dwell in the land of the shadow of death, upon them hath the light shined."

Ha! I knew you'd give that to me, Deborah. I no longer have my scriptures close at hand. My fine leather-bound Mormon edition of the King James is sitting in a box somewhere.

Quote from: stephaniec on June 04, 2016, 02:44:03 PM
These are the words I take from the Old Testament and really nothing more that I incorporate into my everyday thought process. My value in the scripture lies entirely in the New Testament.    "Isaiah 9:2King James Version (KJV)

2 The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light: they that dwell in the land of the shadow of death, upon them hath the light shined."

Personally, I love the Psalms. They were beautifully written and some of them flow like fine poetry.

I have about 3000 theology and philosophy books plus every Bible version available through Logos on my phone and computer.  I got all that when I was studying for ordination and keep it available for reference.  Logos makes searching for and finding things very easy.  LOL

I spent nearly two years as a Mormon at the beginning of my really serious search for God.  They were all very nice people but as I learned more I found things I couldn't accept and they wouldn't explain.  That was primarily related to deification.


Sapere Aude

One problem with discarding the Old Testament is that the Gospel writers rely on it extensively in making the case that Jesus fulfills prophecy as the messiah.  Without those fulfilled prophesies his story is no different than dozens of other apocalyptic preachers that were roaming Israel at the time.


Sapere Aude

Quote from: Deborah on June 04, 2016, 02:53:25 PM

I spent nearly two years as a Mormon at the beginning of my really serious search for God.  They were all very nice people but as I learned more I found things I couldn't accept and they wouldn't explain.  That was primarily related to deification.


Sapere Aude

I grew up in the faith and went on a mission. I was the brunt of many horrendous non-spiritual experiences and told it was because I had a lack of faith. I still hung on, did as they told me, and got married. I was a good member. After a few years, my life fell apart. My beliefs drove me to two suicide attempts. I finally woke up and decided that my life was worth living without all the guilt.

I be back for a more philosophical  approach to my replies, but  how would the people of that time in the year 0-33 AD explain If some Time traveler took a nuclear warhead back in time and exploded it in the desert away from the population , but obviously would be experienced . What kind of stories would there be of the event.

That is precisely the issue.  There are absolutely no stories or reports of a living Jesus before at least 70AD.  It is not believable that all the things he is reported to have done and the things that are reported to have happened went unnoticed by everybody.

Paul did not even claim there was a living Jesus.  His writings claimed he met a spirit.


Sapere Aude

It would have been explained as an act of God expressing his anger as a warning to the sinful. They may have had another round of cleansing killings. Shoot, back then, they didn't even know what the sun or the stars were. Remember, at that time, they believed in the god of vengeance, the one of the Old Testament. But this is all conjecture.

Quote from: Deborah on June 04, 2016, 04:15:33 PM
That is precisely the issue.  There are absolutely no stories or reports of a living Jesus before at least 70AD.  It is not believable that all the things he is reported to have done and the things that are reported to have happened went unnoticed by everybody.

Paul did not even claim there was a living Jesus.  His writings claimed he met a spirit.


Sapere Aude

well, honestly The Jewish people were basically the captive race under revolt. Jerusalem was destroyed in 70AD because the Romans had enough and couldn't bend the jews to their will. With that kind of conflict between the Romans and within the Jewish community you can't reasonably expect to have surviving documentation other than word of mouth. Also the fact the Christ's teaching were banned by both the Romans and the Jewish leaders. The disciples would be the only source for the truth to continue.

to show the turmoil of leaving documentation in that time just take the Essene's . We only know about their philosophies from the documents hidden in a cave away from the Romans. The Romans were't going to allow any information about a King they murdered unjustly or a God when they had their old God in Caesar  .

Matt 27:45. Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour.

The Gospel reports a three hour long eclipse of the sun from noon until 3 pm.  The Romans were there and were literate.  It was also the Passover so Jews from throughout the empire were there too. Yet none of them noticed the sun disappearing for three hours in the middle of the afternoon.  Nobody in the neighboring countries that bordered Israel noticed either.  Reporting a fantastic celestial event that has never happened before would not require them to even connect the event with the crucifixion.

If we go the route of writing this event off as myth making then we simply admit that the gospels are not a reliable witness.  How much more was simply myth making?  And outside them there is nothing else.


Sapere Aude

I think it comes down to what you believe and what I believe which seem to be polar opposites and never the twain shall meet , which is fine.

Quote from: stephaniec on June 04, 2016, 04:50:13 PM
to show the turmoil of leaving documentation in that time just take the Essene's . We only know about their philosophies from the documents hidden in a cave away from the Romans. The Romans were't going to allow any information about a King they murdered unjustly or a God when they had their old God in Caesar  .

FWIW, in the time period up to 70 CE the emperors weren't exactly the ones suffering delusions of godhood.  We're talking about Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, Nero, and then The Year of Four Emperors with Galba/Otho/Vitellius/Vespasian.  A couple of those were rather notoriously looney tunes, but 33 CE was Tiberius and he was very much still playing Octavianus' game of "first citizen" rather than even "emperor," let alone "god."  While Nero may have been a paranoid narcissist, and Caligula a sadist with overweening ambition, I don't believe either of them had himself consecrated a god, either.   

Also, the Romans didn't mind making a spectacle of people they crucified, as Spartacus could attest.  It was kind of the point of the exercise in their opinion.  How can people possibly get the benefit of a good educational crucifixion if you don't tell the world about it?  That's the way to get them to do the only two things the Romans really cared about in their subject nations:  Pay your taxes and don't incite rebellion.  Avoid those two things, and you could probably avoid being crucified in the Roman Empire.  Or paraded through the streets in chains, or whatever other unsubtle punishment the Romans deemed appropriate.  Stalinist "disappearances" weren't on the agenda for them.           

well, I guess it comes to personal beliefs and every has them,

Quote from: Deborah on June 04, 2016, 05:21:29 PM
Matt 27:45. Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour.

The Gospel reports a three hour long eclipse of the sun from noon until 3 pm.  The Romans were there and were literate.  It was also the Passover so Jews from throughout the empire were there too. Yet none of them noticed the sun disappearing for three hours in the middle of the afternoon.  Nobody in the neighboring countries that bordered Israel noticed either.  Reporting a fantastic celestial event that has never happened before would not require them to even connect the event with the crucifixion.

If we go the route of writing this event off as myth making then we simply admit that the gospels are not a reliable witness.  How much more was simply myth making?  And outside them there is nothing else.


Sapere Aude

I'm not going to pursue this issue farther because it comes to personal beliefs, but I will say that the eclipse of the sun could be due to incredibly dark storm clouds turning day into night , which I'm sure everyone has seen in their life time . They would of been very localized being above the dying Lord in an expression of nature as the dying Lord , the God/man gave up his spirit.