PDA

View Full Version : Religion The bible was forged?


Count Zarth
05-16-2011, 07:50 PM
LMAO


http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/05/13/half-of-new-testament-forged-bible-scholar-says/?iref=obnetwork

By John Blake, CNN
(CNN) - A frail man sits in chains inside a dank, cold prison cell. He has escaped death before but now realizes that his execution is drawing near.

“I am already being poured out like a drink offering, and the time of my departure has come,” the man –the Apostle Paul - says in the Bible's 2 Timothy. “I have fought the good fight. I have finished the race. I have kept the faith.”

The passage is one of the most dramatic scenes in the New Testament. Paul, the most prolific New Testament author, is saying goodbye from a Roman prison cell before being beheaded. His goodbye veers from loneliness to defiance and, finally, to joy.

There’s one just one problem - Paul didn’t write those words. In fact, virtually half the New Testament was written by impostors taking on the names of apostles like Paul. At least according to Bart D. Ehrman, a renowned biblical scholar, who makes the charges in his new book
“Forged. (http://www.harpercollins.com/books/Forged-Bart-D-Ehrman/?isbn=9780062012616)”

“There were a lot of people in the ancient world who thought that lying could serve a greater good,” says Ehrman, an expert on ancient biblical manuscripts.In “Forged,” Ehrman claims that:


* At least 11 of the 27 New Testament books are forgeries.
* The New Testament books attributed to Jesus’ disciples could not have been written by them because they were illiterate.
* Many of the New Testament’s forgeries were manufactured by early Christian leaders trying to settle theological feuds.

Ehrman doesn’t confine his critique to Paul’s letters. He challenges the authenticity of the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and John. He says that none were written by Jesus' disciplies, citing two reasons.

He says none of the earliest gospels revealed the names of its authors, and that their current names were later added by scribes.

Ehrman also says that two of Jesus’ original disciples, John and Peter, could not have written the books attributed to them in the New Testament because they were illiterate.

“According to Acts 4:13, both Peter and his companion John, also a fisherman, were agrammatoi, a Greek word that literally means ‘unlettered,’ that is, ‘illiterate,’ ’’ he writes.

Will the real Paul stand up?

Ehrman reserves most of his scrutiny for the writings of Paul, which make up the bulk of the New Testament. He says that only about half of the New Testament letters attributed to Paul – 7 of 13 - were actually written by him.

Paul's remaining books are forgeries, Ehrman says. His proof: inconsistencies in the language, choice of words and blatant contradiction in doctrine.

For example, Ehrman says the book of Ephesians doesn’t conform to Paul’s distinctive Greek writing style. He says Paul wrote in short, pointed sentences while Ephesians is full of long Greek sentences (the opening sentence of thanksgiving in Ephesians unfurls a sentence that winds through 12 verses, he says).

“There’s nothing wrong with extremely long sentences in Greek; it just isn’t the way Paul wrote. It’s like Mark Twain and William Faulkner; they both wrote correctly, but you would never mistake the one for the other,” Ehrman writes.

The scholar also points to a famous passage in 1 Corinthians in which Paul is recorded as saying that women should be “silent” in churches and that “if they wish to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home.”

Only three chapters earlier, in the same book, Paul is urging women who pray and prophesy in church to cover their heads with veils, Ehrman says: “If they were allowed to speak in chapter 11, how could they be told not to speak in chapter 14?”

Why people forged

Forgers often did their work because they were trying to settle early church disputes, Ehrman says. The early church was embroiled in conflict - people argued over the treatment of women, leadership and relations between masters and slaves, he says.


“There was competition among different groups of Christians about what to believe and each of these groups wanted to have authority to back up their views,” he says. “If you were a nobody, you wouldn’t sign your own name to your treatise. You would sign Peter or John.”

So people claiming to be Peter and John - and all sorts of people who claimed to know Jesus - went into publishing overdrive. Ehrman estimates that there were about 100 forgeries created in the name of Jesus’ inner-circle during the first four centuries of the church.

Witherington concedes that fabrications and forgeries floated around the earliest Christian communities.

But he doesn’t accept the notion that Peter, for example, could not have been literate because he was a fisherman.

“Fisherman had to do business. Guess what? That involves writing, contracts and signed documents,” he said in an interview.

Witherington says people will gravitate toward Ehrman’s work because the media loves sensationalism.

“We live in a Jesus-haunted culture that’s biblically illiterate,” he says.
“Almost anything can pass for historical information… A book liked ‘Forged’ can unsettle people who have no third or fourth opinions to draw upon.”

Ehrman, of course, has another point of view.

“Forged” will help people accept something that it took him a long time to accept, says the author, a former fundamentalist who is now an agnostic.

The New Testament wasn’t written by the finger of God, he says – it has human fingerprints all over its pages.

“I’m not saying people should throw it out or it’s not theologically fruitful,” Ehrman says. “I’m saying that by realizing it contains so many forgeries, it shows that it’s a very human book, down to the fact that some authors lied about who they were.”

HolyHandgernade
05-16-2011, 07:59 PM
SHOCKING!

KILLER_CLOWN
05-16-2011, 08:04 PM
That settles it i guess, cnn blogs always consist of truth.

WV
05-16-2011, 08:10 PM
http://www.lostwackys.com/images/original-series/1st/kook-aid.jpg

Msmith
05-18-2011, 12:24 PM
It is not whether that CNN reported the truth. It is the person who was being interviewed: Bart Ehrman. Look up his past and you will find that he is the Darth Vader in theology. Very interesting guy.

Easy 6
05-18-2011, 12:30 PM
Congratulations on your new work Bart, it isnt going to change anyones mind one way or the other.

listopencil
05-18-2011, 12:31 PM
It is not whether that CNN reported the truth. It is the person who was being interviewed: Bart Ehrman. Look up his past and you will find that he is the Darth Vader in theology. Very interesting guy.

So...Darth Vader does voice over work for CNN then later comes back to convince us that the Bible isn't real...on CNN? Holy shit. It finally comes full circle.

Detoxing
05-18-2011, 12:37 PM
I thought everyone (aside from christians) already knew this?

Simplex3
05-18-2011, 12:39 PM
I thought everyone (aside from christians) already knew this?

Yet those same Christians will beat people over the head with a specific phrase they yank from the Bible that happens to coincide with what they want you to do at this moment.

ROYC75
05-18-2011, 12:42 PM
People have denied God, Jesus, the bible for years. Why is this anything different ?

Idiots will be, idiots.

Simplex3
05-18-2011, 12:42 PM
People have denied God, Jesus, the bible for years. Why is this anything different ?

Idiots will be, idiots.

Damn those idiots who look at evidence.

Hydrae
05-18-2011, 12:46 PM
Many of the books were written long after the apostles were dead so, no surprises here. I would think there could be doubts about the authorship of many books in the Old Testament also.

BTW, I find it interesting that the author feels this shows that these are man's words, not God's. What did he expect, God to hand down more tablets in his own hand? I believe most Christians will tell you that they are indeed the word of God, as handed down through a human intermediary.

mikey23545
05-18-2011, 12:48 PM
Actually the Bible was pirated by bittorrent.

God was the original seeder.

Simplex3
05-18-2011, 12:52 PM
BTW, I find it interesting that the author feels this shows that these are man's words, not God's. What did he expect, God to hand down more tablets in his own hand? I believe most Christians will tell you that they are indeed the word of God, as handed down through a human intermediary.

So the contradictions in the Bible where placed there by an infallible being? Or man screwed it up when he wrote it down?

Hydrae
05-18-2011, 12:54 PM
So the contradictions in the Bible where placed there by an infallible being? Or man screwed it up when he wrote it down?

Those aren't contradictions, we humans just can't understand completely so it appears to be a contradiction.


Or something like that...

Simplex3
05-18-2011, 12:55 PM
http://verydemotivational.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/demotivational-posters-untitled20.jpg

ROYC75
05-18-2011, 12:58 PM
http://verydemotivational.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/demotivational-posters-untitled20.jpg

I do not recall Christians claiming there is oxygen at the sun's core ?

Ebolapox
05-18-2011, 01:07 PM
I do not recall Christians claiming there is oxygen at the sun's core ?

the point...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
v

your head

Brock
05-18-2011, 01:07 PM
People have denied God, Jesus, the bible for years. Why is this anything different ?

Idiots will be, idiots.

People have been trying to control other people's behavior through God, Jesus and the bible for millenia.

Control freaks, will, be, control freaks.

Ebolapox
05-18-2011, 01:09 PM
People have been trying to control other people's behavior through God, Jesus and the bible for millenia.

Control freaks, will, be, control freaks.

indeed.

Hydrae
05-18-2011, 01:17 PM
People have been trying to control other people's behavior through God, Jesus and the bible for millenia.

Control freaks, will, be, control freaks.

I have always believed that organized religion and government were started about the same time and for the same purpose, control over others. Two sides of the same coin in many, many ways.

Ebolapox
05-18-2011, 01:20 PM
I have always believed that organized religion and government were started about the same time and for the same purpose, control over others. Two sides of the same coin in many, many ways.

remember, some of the earlier forms of tribal control (that eventually became city-states) were the god-king, who ruled the people by divine right, as the son of a god. the pharoh is a good example of this, but they're littered throughout the ancient world.

ROYC75
05-18-2011, 01:22 PM
remember, some of the earlier forms of tribal control (that eventually became city-states) were the god-king, who ruled the people by divine right, as the son of a god. the pharoh is a good example of this, but they're littered throughout the ancient world.

So which is worse, IYO, Religion or Government ?

Simplex3
05-18-2011, 01:25 PM
So which is worse, IYO, Religion or Government ?

Religion. The fear of eternal damnation and/or desire of eternal bliss allows otherwise rational people to justify horrific things. Generally, however, it's when the two combine that these things happen.

Ebolapox
05-18-2011, 01:28 PM
So which is worse, IYO, Religion or Government ?

six of one, half dozen of the other. they're both a means of exerting control over others. it's like asking me which form of cheesecake gets the job done better: strawberry or peanut butter... both are delicious, both get the job done pretty damned well.

I'll put it this way: I see very little difference between the two, fundamentally.

RedNeckRaider
05-18-2011, 02:06 PM
Religion. The fear of eternal damnation and/or desire of eternal bliss allows otherwise rational people to justify horrific things. Generally, however, it's when the two combine that these things happen.
Excellent reply~

KILLER_CLOWN
05-18-2011, 02:53 PM
People have been trying to control other people's behavior through God, Jesus and the bible for millenia.

Control freaks, will, be, control freaks.

I guess the Assholes in charge have nothing to do with it? Would you feel better if the government tried to control your behavior through terrorism? Oh wait that's already happened.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 04:52 PM
Even most Christians know and accept this stuff from the OP. Just because it's on CNN doesn't mean it's brand new information. Bart Ehrman has been running this schtick into the ground.

He's a good historian. He's a bad theologian (and he doesn't care to be one). His wife remains an Episcopal priest, as far as I know, and I wonder if she tires of the publicity he has earned from this pop history.

Simplex3
05-18-2011, 04:57 PM
Even most Christians know and accept this stuff from the OP.

Yet they continue to pick and choose Bible passages as they see fit so that it props up their bigoted ideas.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 04:59 PM
Religion. The fear of eternal damnation and/or desire of eternal bliss allows otherwise rational people to justify horrific things. Generally, however, it's when the two combine that these things happen.

No. The question is simple, too simple. Your answer is too simple-minded.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 05:05 PM
Yet they continue to pick and choose Bible passages as they see fit so that it props up their bigoted ideas.

Who is they? All Christians? Some Christians you know?

Brock
05-18-2011, 05:07 PM
Who is they? All Christians? Some Christians you know?

The same "most" of them you referred to earlier.

Simplex3
05-18-2011, 05:08 PM
No. The question is simple, too simple. Your answer is too simple-minded.

Remind us again how the Muslim Conquests and the Crusades went down. Or the Spanish Inquisition. Maybe the Thirty Years War. The French Wars of Religion. Hell, the entire Middle East for thousands of years.

To truly stir up a large, disparate group of people to war with another group of people you need to cast someone as evil. To do that you need some form of religion.

Otherwise you're asking one guy who just wants to stay home and feed his family to fight to the death with another guy who just wants to stay home and feed his family.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 05:14 PM
The same "most" of them you referred to earlier.

Sorry, mainstream denominations do not simply pick and choose which Biblical passages to run with just so they can prop up their bigoted ideas. There's a lot of thought that goes into why mainstream Christian denominations have the beliefs they do.

Simplex3
05-18-2011, 05:15 PM
Sorry, mainstream denominations do not simply pick and choose which Biblical passages to run with just so they can prop up their bigoted ideas. There's a lot of thought that goes into why mainstream Christian denominations have the beliefs they do.

Yes, Brock, those passages were picked and chosen by dudes who are totally learned and smart and not bigoted at all and stuff. Trust us.

Simplex3
05-18-2011, 05:16 PM
I wonder how Jenson believes other religions put in a lot of thought and just wound up so totally wrong.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 05:18 PM
Remind us again how the Muslim Conquests and the Crusades went down. Or the Spanish Inquisition. Maybe the Thirty Years War. The French Wars of Religion. Hell, the entire Middle East for thousands of years.

To truly stir up a large, disparate group of people to war with another group of people you need to cast someone as evil. To do that you need some form of religion.

Otherwise you're asking one guy who just wants to stay home and feed his family to fight to the death with another guy who just wants to stay home and feed his family.

1) You don't have the historical knowledge to tell us how the Muslim Conquests and the Crusades or the Spanish Inquisition or Thirty Years War, or French Wars of Religion went down. You don't know what those are except perhaps through a viewing of some B program on the History Channel, so spare us the lectures of their historical significance.

2) That doesn't begin to answer the unanswerable question of which is worse: religion or government. How can you possibly answer such a silly question? Are all religions worse than all governments? Is the Mormon religion worse than the Third Reich? Is the United States better than Catholicism? It doesn't make any sense to answer that.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 05:21 PM
I wonder how Jenson believes other religions put in a lot of thought and just wound up so totally wrong.

Even if I'm not a Muslim, I can still learn of the development of Muslim theology and realize that smart people, smarter than you, spent a lot of time, energy, and thought developing the ideas there.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 05:23 PM
Yes, Brock, those passages were picked and chosen by dudes who are totally learned and smart and not bigoted at all and stuff. Trust us.

You come off a little bigoted yourself. Trust me on that one.

Simplex3
05-18-2011, 05:29 PM
Even if I'm not a Muslim, I can still learn of the development of Muslim theology and realize that smart people, smarter than you, spent a lot of time, energy, and thought developing the ideas there.

But they wound up wrong, right? The only ones that managed to be right agree with the religion your parents were, right?

ROYC75
05-18-2011, 05:37 PM
six of one, half dozen of the other. they're both a means of exerting control over others. it's like asking me which form of cheesecake gets the job done better: strawberry or peanut butter... both are delicious, both get the job done pretty damned well.

I'll put it this way: I see very little difference between the two, fundamentally.

One could clearly look at radical religion and radical government as about the same, just as you speak of.It's easy to look at wars of the past and relate them to religion, even early biblical times. Religion is suppose to be peaceful, it's when man intervenes his personal perspective into it it becomes a problem. When difference of opinions concur, people want to argue or fight over getting their way across. Christians are pretty much suppose to refrain from violence at all cost. Politicians do not, they want to fight, argue, corruption ,whatever it takes to get it's points across.

IMHO, government & religion is clearly much different. Pure, peaceful honest religion is nothing like government. Religion is a freedom to worship the one and true sovereign God as they please. It's to care for the needy, put others first in the time of need under ones free will.

Government simply imposes it's will upon the people, mandatory rules , regulations, taxes, etc.

Brock
05-18-2011, 05:38 PM
Sorry, mainstream denominations do not simply pick and choose which Biblical passages to run with just so they can prop up their bigoted ideas. There's a lot of thought that goes into why mainstream Christian denominations have the beliefs they do.

No, mainstream denominations do that too. There is more politics than thought at work in churches.

ROYC75
05-18-2011, 05:41 PM
No, mainstream denominations do that too. There is more politics than thought at work in churches.

Not all ..... That's a blanket statement rolling all religion into one.

Brock
05-18-2011, 05:42 PM
Not all ..... That's a blanket statement rolling all religion into one.

In response to another blanket statement, so what?

Simplex3
05-18-2011, 05:43 PM
Pure, peaceful honest religion is nothing like government. Religion is a freedom to worship the one and true sovereign God as they please.

Pure, peaceful religion exists about as often as pure, peaceful government. And I guess the Hindus and Buddhists and Muslims and everyone else can just piss of since they don't worship the Christian god? Does that extend to people who are in the wrong denomination?

Government simply imposes it's will upon the people, mandatory rules , regulations, taxes, etc.

Don't be gay. No sex before marriage. No using birth control. Give us 10% of your earnings. Or you'll go to hell. Freaking governments.

Oh, wait...

loochy
05-18-2011, 05:47 PM
Pure, peaceful religion exists about as often as pure, peaceful government. And I guess the Hindus and Buddhists and Muslims and everyone else can just piss of since they don't worship the Christian god? Does that extend to people who are in the wrong denomination?



Don't be gay. No sex before marriage. No using birth control. Give us 10% of your earnings. Or you'll go to hell. Freaking governments.

Oh, wait...

Well clearly you don't know what you are talking about because that's not how it works in Christianity.

Simplex3
05-18-2011, 05:50 PM
Well clearly you don't know what you are talking about because that's not how it works in Christianity.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but you're going to have to specify a denomination here.

Frankly at this point we're all speaking in such broad generalities that we're almost saying nothing, and I include myself in that.

ROYC75
05-18-2011, 05:51 PM
Pure, peaceful religion exists about as often as pure, peaceful government. And I guess the Hindus and Buddhists and Muslims and everyone else can just piss of since they don't worship the Christian god? Does that extend to people who are in the wrong denomination?



Don't be gay. No sex before marriage. No using birth control. Give us 10% of your earnings. Or you'll go to hell. Freaking governments.

Oh, wait...

You have a sad outlook on life son. If everybody respect the other person in life, we wouldn't have to worry about religion. Lack of respect is the culprit here.

Wrong denominations ? There could well be many, the choice is up to the person and God.

Governments do require you to do things, church is of you own free will.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 05:52 PM
But they wound up wrong, right? The only ones that managed to be right agree with the religion your parents were, right?

Good Lord, the black/white of your world is incompatible with mine. I urge you to take a moment looking through an Encyclopedia or even wikipedia and looking up who, outside of Aristotle and St. Augustine, was the single greatest influence on the theology and philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas, and then try to peg religions as being so strongly adverse towards one another as you seem to be wanting me to admit to.

What is your deal? Are you still in the sophomoric phase of mockingly gaping at how one religion is so self-assured when another is equally so?

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 05:54 PM
No, mainstream denominations do that too. There is more politics than thought at work in churches.

Politics can be and probably has been a component of that thought. Not sure why that would be such a negative thing though. And I don't see how that proves "they're" all just trying to prop up their own bigoted thoughts.

CrazyPhuD
05-18-2011, 05:55 PM
Dude look at that surname of the author of the study 'Ehrman'. Is he really trying to jew us out of the new testament?

Simplex3
05-18-2011, 05:56 PM
What is your deal? Are you still in the sophomoric phase of mockingly gaping at how one religion is so self-assured when another is equally so?

You've always come off as a "Catholicism is the only path to God" type. If that's incorrect, great.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 05:58 PM
Don't be gay. No sex before marriage. No using birth control. Give us 10% of your earnings. Or you'll go to hell. Freaking governments.

Oh, wait...

Yeah, there's absolutely no comparison between the force of Christianity and the force of government in the modern world. The power is so disproportionately on the side of government that your argument in this post is even more ridiculous than your previous post, which was more of a "armchair historical" bullshit.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 06:01 PM
You've always come off as a "Catholicism is the only path to God" type. If that's incorrect, great.

Such a loaded statement, I can't expect you to come up with the nuanced analysis needed to understand it.

Simplex3
05-18-2011, 06:02 PM
Yeah, there's absolutely no comparison between the force of Christianity and the force of government in the modern world. The power is so disproportionately on the side of government that your argument in this post is even more ridiculous than your previous post, which was more of a "armchair historical" bullshit.

There was someone in this very thread who's a Christian "just in case". Religion is less compelling every day, and I'm very glad for that. But to claim they have different desires, as Roy was, is disingenuous. They both want to establish laws/rules/whatever to control their constituents.

Simplex3
05-18-2011, 06:02 PM
Such a loaded statement, I can't expect you to come up with the nuanced analysis needed to understand it.

LMAO Whatever helps you sleep at night.

ROYC75
05-18-2011, 06:07 PM
There was someone in this very thread who's a Christian "just in case". Religion is less compelling every day, and I'm very glad for that. But to claim they have different desires, as Roy was, is disingenuous. They both want to establish laws/rules/whatever to control their constituents.

God and church allows you to have a choice, free to make that choice, government does not.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 06:09 PM
LMAO Whatever helps you sleep at night.

One summer I worked in the dairy aisle at Hy-Vee with this one guy, Greg. Greg was about 40 years old and worked from 7am-2pm on weekdays. I stocked the milk, cheese, etc. with Greg each day. There was never a day when Greg didn't rant to me about the incompetence of the management at this particular store. As he saw it, they were complete idiots who didn't know what the hell they were doing and wouldn't be able to figure it out if their life depended on it.

I asked Greg once if he ever tried to become a manager at the store, and he told me that he thought about it, but didn't want to end up working like those idiots there. And then he went to the back of the store to bring up another crate of milk.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 06:13 PM
There was someone in this very thread who's a Christian "just in case". Religion is less compelling every day, and I'm very glad for that. But to claim they have different desires, as Roy was, is disingenuous. They both want to establish laws/rules/whatever to control their constituents.

Yeah, that's a popular cynical view by some who think they're better than everyone else. It doesn't really have a basis in reality, but it has that biting contrariness that makes it sound so sophisticated to some. You might as well tell us that the Constitution was only designed by rich white males who felt their landed slave-holding aristocracy was being threatened so we can totally ignore you.

ROYC75
05-18-2011, 06:18 PM
There was someone in this very thread who's a Christian "just in case". Religion is less compelling every day, and I'm very glad for that. But to claim they have different desires, as Roy was, is disingenuous. They both want to establish laws/rules/whatever to control their constituents.

So you do feel that religion and government are the same ? Same principals, controlling,oppressing, etc.

Count Zarth
05-18-2011, 07:30 PM
God and church allows you to have a choice, free to make that choice, government does not.

http://i53.tinypic.com/1zbvytg.jpg

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 07:43 PM
The Dark Ages is that period of time after the Roman Empire fell when no one really ruled. There was never a time when the Church ruled. Not even in the Middle Ages. Then, the Church played a huge role in society. It didn't rule. Kings ruled. Lords ruled over peasants, princes over their domains. But not priests and popes.

bowener
05-18-2011, 07:58 PM
The Dark Ages is that period of time after the Roman Empire fell when no one really ruled. There was never a time when the Church ruled. Not even in the Middle Ages. Then, the Church played a huge role in society. It didn't rule. Kings ruled. Lords ruled over peasants, princes over their domains. But not priests and popes.

So... the Pope never "ruled" (close enough for now) over the Kings and forced them to do things the Church's way lest they be excommunicated?

Adept Havelock
05-18-2011, 07:59 PM
The Dark Ages is that period of time after the Roman Empire fell when no one really ruled. There was never a time when the Church ruled. Not even in the Middle Ages. Then, the Church played a huge role in society. It didn't rule. Kings ruled. Lords ruled over peasants, princes over their domains. But not priests and popes.

To deny (by omission) their actions "behind the scenes" of those thrones is intellectually dishonest.

So... the Pope never "ruled" (close enough for now) over the Kings and forced them to do things the Church's way lest they be excommunicated?

Oh, of course not. They would NEVER do such a thing.

And even if they did, It's OK because God told Peter he was in charge.

Count Zarth
05-18-2011, 08:02 PM
You played that one poorly, Jenson. The correct response was to say that the Church kept The Dark Ages from being The Pitch Black Ages.

Simplex3
05-18-2011, 08:06 PM
So you do feel that religion and government are the same ? Same principals, controlling,oppressing, etc.

Identical outcomes? No. They no longer have equal power in the US. The church is clearly weakened. That doesn't mean the church doesn't still wield influence politically. Look at gay marriage and abortion rights. Issues clearly driven by religion.

We can argue forever over whether organized religion is designed to control the majority to favor the purveyors or if that's just a side effect. I'm sure it's also different in different individual churches.

Simplex3
05-18-2011, 08:07 PM
To deny (by omission) their actions "behind the scenes" of those thrones is intellectually dishonest.



Oh, of course not. They would NEVER do such a thing.

And even if they did, It's OK because God told Peter he was in charge.

You played that one poorly, Jenson. The correct response was to say that the Church kept The Dark Ages from being The Pitch Black Ages.



You dumb bastards just can't get the nuances and the gray areas.

Brock
05-18-2011, 08:10 PM
The Dark Ages is that period of time after the Roman Empire fell when no one really ruled. There was never a time when the Church ruled. Not even in the Middle Ages. Then, the Church played a huge role in society. It didn't rule. Kings ruled. Lords ruled over peasants, princes over their domains. But not priests and popes.

I thought you were smarter than this. Kings were terrified of the popes, at least until Henry VIII told them to f off.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 08:20 PM
So... the Pope never "ruled" (close enough for now) over the Kings and forced them to do things the Church's way lest they be excommunicated?

Why is "ruled" close enough for now? I don't think it's very close. The power the Church had and the power the King had was often a struggle between the two. The King did his best not to offend the Pope, but it's not like he felt under his thumb due to Papal decrees. Excommunications or threats of weren't the norm.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 08:22 PM
To deny (by omission) their actions "behind the scenes" of those thrones is intellectually dishonest.

Who is denying their influence? You're being intellectually dishonest if you accuse me of trying to say the Church wasn't powerful. There's a huge misconception that the Church ruled over everyone with an iron fist in the "dark ages" and threw people in jail or whatever the hell they think happened.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 08:23 PM
I thought you were smarter than this. Kings were terrified of the popes, at least until Henry VIII told them to f off.

No, they weren't terrified of popes.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 08:24 PM
You played that one poorly, Jenson. The correct response was to say that the Church kept The Dark Ages from being The Pitch Black Ages.

I think that's accurate.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 08:28 PM
I thought you were smarter than this. Kings were terrified of the popes, at least until Henry VIII told them to f off.

Extra! Extra! Read all about it: Norman prince attacks and defeats Pope's army: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Civitate

Pope held hostage.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 08:30 PM
Extra! Extra! Read all about it: Henry II slays Archbishop of Canterbury Thomas Becket in cathedral: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Becket#Assassination

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 08:32 PM
And the entire country of France for most of their history didn't give a damn about the Pope. It was a unique brand of Catholicism.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 08:34 PM
Huge question in the Middle Ages: Are you a Guelph (Pope supporter) or a Ghibelline (HRE supporter)?

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 08:39 PM
Let's face it: this shit isn't taught in schools, so it's no surprise when people don't know what the fuck they're talking about on the subject. I don't think it ever really was. Most people's conception of the Middle Ages comes from some Hollywood movies and who the hell knows where. It's atrocious. And I wouldn't mind all that much, except when people go around pretending like they know what the hell the Middle Ages was like when they really have no clue.

Count Zarth
05-18-2011, 08:43 PM
I think that's accurate.

No, sorry. You don't get to piggyback on my pagan debating logic.

Count Zarth
05-18-2011, 08:45 PM
Let's face it: this shit isn't taught in schools.

You're an idiot. AP European history is a college-level class commonly taught in high schools. Both my sister and myself took it and this was over a decade ago.

You are not some enlightened font of knowledge on history.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 08:45 PM
No, sorry. You don't get to piggyback on my pagan debating logic.

What you said is pretty much the historical black letter law of the "dark ages" -- the only reason we were able to keep some culture in the western world was because of the monasteries.

Brock
05-18-2011, 08:46 PM
No, they weren't terrified of popes.

Yes, Jenson, the leaders of your utterly corrupt church of that day, were powerful enough to control kings.

Brock
05-18-2011, 08:47 PM
Let's face it: this shit isn't taught in schools, so it's no surprise when people don't know what the fuck they're talking about on the subject. I don't think it ever really was. Most people's conception of the Middle Ages comes from some Hollywood movies and who the hell knows where. It's atrocious. And I wouldn't mind all that much, except when people go around pretending like they know what the hell the Middle Ages was like when they really have no clue.

You've suddenly become a really arrogant person, and quite unjustifiably so.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 08:47 PM
You're an idiot. AP European history is a college-level class commonly taught in high schools. Both my sister and myself took it and this was over a decade ago.

You are not some enlightened font of knowledge on history.

LOL at that class being proof that the complexities of the Middle Ages is taught in ordinary schools.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 08:50 PM
You've suddenly become a really arrogant person, and quite unjustifiably so.

For the last six years on this site I've had arguments with people who throw out these random factoids dealing with the Catholic Church.

For instance, did you know that the Spanish Inquisition killed over 1,000,000 people?

Did you know that Galileo was tortured by the Church until he was forced to admit that the sun revolved around the earth?

Did you know that the Popes terrified European Kings into doing whatever they wanted? Oh yeah, you knew that one.

It's not true!!! IT'S NOT TRUE BUT NO ONE CARES TO LEARN!!!

Count Zarth
05-18-2011, 08:51 PM
LOL at that class being proof that the complexities of the Middle Ages is taught in ordinary schools.

Keep moving those goalposts. I WENT TO AN ORDINARY SCHOOL.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 08:54 PM
Keep moving those goalposts. I WENT TO AN ORDINARY SCHOOL.

I made a comment that this stuff (the Middle Ages) is not taught in schools. That's a generalized comment, and pinpointing how you learned about this (which you apparently didn't learn too well) from your AP European history class is not a good counter-argument. How many people take that class? Not many. How many of the classes deal specifically on what we're talking about? Not many.

Your AP European history class probably started in the Renaissance anyway, after the Middle Ages.

Simplex3
05-18-2011, 08:56 PM
http://www.dmiblog.com/archives/Shovel%20ready.jpg

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 08:57 PM
Keep moving those goalposts. I WENT TO AN ORDINARY SCHOOL.

LMAO

http://www.collegeboard.com/student/testing/ap/sub_eurohist.html

AP European history focuses on Europe beginning in 1450.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 08:57 PM
Hey Simplex, instead of posting pictures, you should spend your time trying to flesh out your previous shallow arguments.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 09:01 PM
You've suddenly become a really arrogant person, and quite unjustifiably so.

Picture this: you spend 6 years of your life studying agriculture. You aced all your agriculture classes and it's a huge passion for you. You know all the stages of harvesting and how to produce the best yield. Then at the bar, you hear Ned and Steve going on about how they prayed to determine when to plant, and how all the agriculture classes and information is just bullshit. You tell them they are wrong, and they insist that they know what they're talking about. Now imagine that frustration when not only Ned and Steve, but Joe, Earl and Bob all gather around you. It's annoying.

Simplex3
05-18-2011, 09:07 PM
Hey Simplex, instead of posting pictures, you should spend your time trying to flesh out your previous shallow arguments.

It's painfully clear you're still eyeballs deep in church doctrine. If it works for you that's fine. But I'm not going to spend a bunch of time doing legwork for someone that isn't actually open to it.

Count Zarth
05-18-2011, 09:16 PM
It's painfully clear you're still eyeballs deep in church doctrine.

Eyeballs deep in...balls?

Count Zarth
05-18-2011, 09:16 PM
LMAO

http://www.collegeboard.com/student/testing/ap/sub_eurohist.html

AP European history focuses on Europe beginning in 1450.

FYI, dipshit, you don't have a clue what I studied or what others are studying. Every course is not the same.

Pitt Gorilla
05-18-2011, 09:17 PM
God and church allows you to have a choice, free to make that choice, government does not.You have the choice to disobey the government as well.

Count Zarth
05-18-2011, 09:26 PM
The funniest thing about this thread is that the church was DEFINITELY one of the parties turning the bible into a big fat fraudulent book...Jenson won't hear any of that though....I'm sure there was a good reason for it...that wasn't motivated by power or profit.

stevieray
05-18-2011, 09:27 PM
LMAO

The verse in Acts refers to what the Sanhedrin perceived of Peter and John.

Count Zarth
05-18-2011, 09:27 PM
Yep, the CHURCH SURE MADE THE DARK AGES A KILLER TIME!

At the center of the Dark Ages stood the Christian Bible. All scientific thought which contradicted the Bible was suppressed, with the most famous example being the ancient knowledge that the earth revolved around the sun.

The Christian Bible states very clearly that the sun revolves around the earth. The result was that for centuries the important astronomical discovery that the sun was the center of the universe was deliberately suppressed by the church, with proponents of the non-Christian theory being persecuted for their endeavors.

Another famous suppression of scientific advance created by the church was the belief that the earth was round. The Bible talks very clearly of the four corners of the earth, therefore, the church argued, it must be square. This dogmatic belief was quietly dropped only when the voyages of discovery finally proved beyond debate that the earth was round: despite this fact having been known by the non-Christian Classical Greeks since the time of Alexander.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 09:34 PM
It's painfully clear you're still eyeballs deep in church doctrine. If it works for you that's fine. But I'm not going to spend a bunch of time doing legwork for someone that isn't actually open to it.

The next time you want to bring your cookie-cutter bullshit history knowledge in here, remember that someone will challenge you on your huge, half-ass assertions. So either study up or shut up.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 09:35 PM
FYI, dipshit, you don't have a clue what I studied or what others are studying. Every course is not the same.

Reading people's posts tells me (not what people studied but) what people didn't study. I know you're hopelessly ignorant on the subject.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 09:39 PM
Yep, the CHURCH SURE MADE THE DARK AGES A KILLER TIME!

A classic, 'I read it on the internet, therefore it's true.'

The Church never argued that the earth was square. In fact, most Church authorities would have held, as Aristotle did, that the world was round. Aristotle, by the way, was one of the key inspiration for the belief that the sun revolved around the earth, which the Church did defend.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 09:40 PM
The funniest thing about this thread is that the church was DEFINITELY one of the parties turning the bible into a big fat fraudulent book...Jenson won't hear any of that though....I'm sure there was a good reason for it...that wasn't motivated by power or profit.

No, as I indicated in my first post, the funniest thing about this thread is that it exists and purports to be a news item.

stevieray
05-18-2011, 09:40 PM
Yep, the CHURCH SURE MADE THE DARK AGES A KILLER TIME!

...that's man adding his own belief to the Bible.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 09:41 PM
...that's man adding his own belief to the Bible.

What you understand about your own religion's history is roughly the same amount that gochiefs understands. And that should be unsettling for any Christian.

Simplex3
05-18-2011, 09:42 PM
I just called my parents to thank them for putting up with me back when I knew it all.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 09:45 PM
I just called my parents to thank them for putting up with me back when I knew it all.

I empathize with them, because tonight I had to read Simplex's mind-numbing thoughts about, "dude, power, dude, and religion, and government, dude . . . bullshit man, they just want to keep us down."

You're at this age where you're so ignorant, but you're too stubborn and elitist to overcome the ignorance, and probably too old to change your ways. In 40 years, you're probably still going to be vomiting out the tired cliches.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 09:47 PM
I just called my parents to thank them for putting up with me back when I knew it all.

Feel free to list the resources you used in becoming educated about the Church in the Middle Ages. That goes for all of you. History Channel doesn't count. Summer blockbusters don't count. Disney movies or rides don't count either. Shit you learned from your 9th grade history teacher who spent more time creating football plays than lesson plans might count to a small degree.

Simplex3
05-18-2011, 09:50 PM
I empathize with them, because tonight I had to read Simplex's mind-numbing thoughts about, "dude, power, dude, and religion, and government, dude . . . bullshit man, they just want to keep us down."

Not even you're stupid enough to have missed the point of that post.

I get you lashing out at people who disagree with religion. It threatens your world view and that can be really uncomfortable. But when you lashed out at stevieray just now you proved that you're just being an asshole.

bowener
05-18-2011, 09:55 PM
Feel free to list the resources you used in becoming educated about the Church in the Middle Ages. That goes for all of you. History Channel doesn't count. Summer blockbusters don't count. Disney movies or rides don't count either. Shit you learned from your 9th grade history teacher who spent more time creating football plays than lesson plans might count to a small degree.

Nah, you're right dude, we're all misinformed by our turrible educations. It seems strange that all of us but you seem to have learned the same things though. I'm not saying you are wrong... fuck, maybe you went to a sweet private school on the east coast. Not me, just state schools here. Our group will stick to our side of the playground, you can stick to your side. Don't come ask for your ball back when it bounces over here though.

stevieray
05-18-2011, 09:59 PM
What you understand about your own religion's history is roughly the same amount that gochiefs understands. And that should be unsettling for any Christian.

:LOL:

...did you tear your garment after reading my post?


but just for fun, please expound upon the statement 'your own religion's history'

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 10:01 PM
Not even you're stupid enough to have missed the point of that post.

I get you lashing out at people who disagree with religion. It threatens your world view and that can be really uncomfortable. But when you lashed out at stevieray just now you proved that you're just being an asshole.

It's amazing how totally comfortable I am about talking about Church corruption and shady historical facts. I'm a history student. I thrive on it. You want to talk about the Renaissance Papacy? I'm there, fucko. It's so non-threatening to me and my worldview because my worldview is about following the historical reality of the human beings and our institutions.

The difference between you and me right in here isn't that I'm Catholic and you're not. It's that I made it a part of me to learn about the subject, and you haven't.

You want to have a serious discussion about religion, the existence of God, the infallibility of the Pope? I'm all for it. But bring something to the table. You haven't done that and have cowered away when pressed.

Stevieray deserves my comment. He's made no effort in learning about the Church, yet continues his lame, ignorant snarky under-cutting of it. Try acting like his White Knight now in order to get after me, but anyone can see that you've just spent most of this thread deriding people exactly like stevieray for his beliefs.

Brock
05-18-2011, 10:02 PM
LOL, Jenson must be going through some shit. He's generally not this dickish.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 10:05 PM
Nah, you're right dude, we're all misinformed by our turrible educations. It seems strange that all of us but you seem to have learned the same things though. I'm not saying you are wrong... ****, maybe you went to a sweet private school on the east coast. Not me, just state schools here. Our group will stick to our side of the playground, you can stick to your side. Don't come ask for your ball back when it bounces over here though.

It's not strange at all. We live in the modern world. Our present beliefs shape our understanding of history. We live in a secular world, where church is an option. To think otherwise strikes the modern human as scary.

Don't deny it: Medieval history is not taught in schools. American history is. Modern European history is.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 10:08 PM
but just for fun, please expound upon the statement 'your own religion's history'

The history of Christianity. You know very little of it. For instance, you probably believe that the Catholic Church force-fed people the belief that the earth was square, and tortured people.

I've known you 8 years. You have no idea what the hell you're talking about when it comes to Christian history or theology. It's just a bunch of Sunday school gobbly gook from you. It doesn't mean that you're a bad person.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 10:09 PM
LOL, Jenson must be going through some shit. He's generally not this dickish.

I can consider that I overreacted in some of my comments. Nearly being accused of intellectual dishonesty when the very thing I was arguing against was an ignorance of history struck me as fighting words.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 10:13 PM
And, it's true that the Catholic Church and mainstream Protestant denominations is something that I find the world has become better because of, not in spite of. I also believe that the world is better because the United States government has existed and I would defend that strongly too.

Count Zarth
05-18-2011, 10:24 PM
And, it's true that the Catholic Church and mainstream Protestant denominations is something that I find the world has become better because of.

Good thing the Catholic Church didn't try to crush the protestants.

Jenson71
05-18-2011, 10:26 PM
Good thing the Catholic Church didn't try to crush the protestants.

Both sides did a lot of bloody crushing. And both sides equally loved crushing the Anabaptists.

Dave Lane
05-18-2011, 10:34 PM
I think they are insane if they think 16 of 27 of the books were written by real "the people who actually were in the bible" authors. maybe Paul and his group of of books. Thats it, period end of story.

stevieray
05-18-2011, 10:38 PM
The history of Christianity. You know very little of it. For instance, you probably believe that the Catholic Church force-fed people the belief that the earth was square, and tortured people.

I've known you 8 years. You have no idea what the hell you're talking about when it comes to Christian history or theology. It's just a bunch of Sunday school gobbly gook from you. It doesn't mean that you're a bad person.

nice edit....even though you really don't get to decide if that's true...just like you don't decide what my religion is. I've never claimed to be a Christian on this board.

known me for eight years? you know very little about me.

alnorth
05-18-2011, 10:40 PM
Don't believe in God.

Also don't see christianity as threatening.

Don't think its possible to shout people out of whatever fairy-tale they believe in to cope with the thought of dying.

Not interested in trying.

Leaving Thread.

Dave Lane
05-18-2011, 11:11 PM
The Gathering Darkness



“The Bible is not a textbook in science. Its world view is that of the childhood of the race, and this primitive cosmology is seen in all its references to the physical world.
The earth is conceived as flat and stationary. The sky is a canopy or vault through whose windows the rain falls. The sun, moon, and stars are contained within this vault. Beneath the earth is Sheol, the realm of the dead. The world and the creatures in it, according to the scripture, were made in six days.
The world in which the Bible was written was one in which human destiny was determined by the stars, sickness caused by demon possession, the dead were raised, angels stirred the waters of a pool for the healing of the sick, and the Red Sea was parted.”

– Bratton (A History of the Bible, p22)



At the center of the Christian Dark Ages stood the Bible.

This fabricated compendium of garbled history, borrowed mythology, genocidal conflict and pious platitudes was elevated as the font of all wisdom, even as the bonfires set by Christian zealots reduced the science of a millennium to ash. In the new Christian tyranny all scientific thought which contradicted the Bible was suppressed. If rationality and observation contradicted the "revealed Word of God" then it was rationality and the observer who were in error.

"For the Christian, it is enough to believe that the cause of all things, whether in heaven or on earth, whether visible or invisible, is nothing other than the goodness of the Creator."
– St. Augustine (Enchiridion 3.9)

In the early 340s a fanatic, Firmicus Maternus, wrote to the emperors Constantius and Constans ('De Errore'). He was one of the first Christians to urge the persecution of pagans, for which he promised the 'reward from God.' The monarchs needed little encouragement – persecution began immediately, with pagan sacrifice made a capital offence in 353. Records Gibbon:

"The sons of Constantine trod in the footsteps of their father, with more zeal, and with less discretion ... every indulgence was shown to the illegal behaviour of the Christians ; every doubt was explained to the disadvantage of Paganism; and the demolition of the temples was celebrated as one of the auspicious events of the reign of Constans and Constantius."



Even during the brief reign of the pagan emperor Julian, the Temple of Apollo at Daphne (Antioch) had been burned down by Christian arsonists. His successor, the sadistic Valens, restored tax and other privileges to the Church, rescinded by Julian, and waged a particularly vicious campaign against the dead emperor's supporters (in vain, attempting a coup under Julian's cousin Procopius). In Italy, Gratian chose this moment to seize the immense wealth of the Temple of Vesta, protector goddess of the city of Rome.

Within a generation, the wildest dreams of Firmicus were fulfilled with the institution of the theocratic tyranny of Theodosius and the subsequent murder of scientists, the destruction of libraries, and eliminated and silencing of intellectuals.

"All heretics we pronounce mad and foolish ... these are to be visited first by the divine vengeance, and secondly by the stroke of our own authority, which we have received in accordance with the will of Heaven."

Thus spoke Theodosius in 380 (Norwich, p118).

A new and darker culture emerged. In 397, at the 4th Church Council of Carthage, the synod drew up a list of approved books of the Catholic canon and at the same time instituted a prohibition on anyone, including Christian bishops, from studying pagan literature. Non-Christian teachers, army officers, public employees and judges were dismissed from office. Early in the 5th century John Chrysostom (erstwhile patriarch in Constantinople) recorded with delight:

"And as for the writings of the Greeks, they are all put out and vanished"
('Homily 2, Trinity, Sophists, Philosophers, 5').

He goes on to describe Pythagoras as a sorcerer and barbarian!

Within half a century, imperial edicts required the burning of non-Christian books. Many libraries of antiquity had been attached to temples, academies, and public baths and therefore suffered in the general attack by Christians on these vulgar pagan edifices. Plato's Academy, and the last of the pagan schools, were closed by Justinian in 529.

In contrast to the assault upon science and paganism, imperial patronage and wealth from the elite poured into a plethora of new churches, monasteries and nunneries – glorifying God and securing for their patrons 'a place in heaven.' Starved of funds, as well as legality, scientific research inevitably withered and died.


End of Scientific Method

The 'philosophy of the pagans' and secular public education were thus marginalised and eliminated. Lamented Ammianus Marcellinus , Rome's last great historian (who died in 395):

"Those few mansions which were once celebrated for the serious cultivation of liberal studies, now are filled with ridiculous amusements of torpid indolence ... The libraries, like tombs, are closed forever."

For those bright and privileged enough to seek education, career opportunities now lay exclusively within the hierarchy of the church and a Christianised state bureaucracy. With the active cooperation of the imperial court the Church had grasped complete control over education and, having done so, restricted instruction to potential priests.

Initially, rhetoric and grammar remained on the syllabus but knowledge which did not serve the purposes of the Church was suppressed. Mathematics, with its historic link to the 'demonic' philosophy of the Pythagoreans, was especially suspect:

"The good Christian should beware of mathematicians, and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that the mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and to confine man in the bonds of Hell."
– St. Augustine, De Genesi ad Litteram, Book II, xviii, 37.



Some classic writers – Homer (in whose work Christians saw allegories), Plato and Aristotle (philosophies which 'anticipated' Christianity'), and some poetic and rhetorical works (Juvenal, Ovid and Horace) useful as teaching aids – were preserved; most were destroyed.

Such was Christian hostility to general learning and practical knowledge that access to scripture itself was forbidden to any lay-person who might still be literate. Preoccupied with ceremonial and holy pageants, within a few generations most members of the priesthood could not even read their own Bible. Ritual had replaced reading, iconography had replaced words.

Scientific method – empirical observation of the natural world, the testing of hypotheses and revision of assumptions – had no role in an age in which eternal truth had been made known to man by the revealed Word of God.


The Natural World Demonized

In this harsh and solemn world of Christ the rich variety of public entertainments of an earlier age were replaced by a meagre diet of pious ceremonials in which the Christian monarch and his retinue appeared ever-grander, ever more remote from mere mortals. (The emperor Hadrian had once been accosted by an old woman and chided for ignoring her petition; he read it. Christian monarchs could only be approached by courtiers, forced to prostrate themselves and kiss the hem of the imperial garments.)

The frequent public holidays – more than half the year during the empire's golden age – disappeared with the gods they honoured. The pagan festivals had not only provided generous leisure time but had brought nature and the seasons into peoples lives.

In the Christian monarchy 'Nature' was now seen as the domain of evil spirits, not a realm worthy of respect and exploration. Joyful public holidays were replaced by solemn commemorations of biblical events.

"The Platonists and their Christian successors held the peculiar notion that the Earth was tainted and somehow nasty, while the heavens were perfect and divine. The fundamental idea that the Earth is a planet, that we are citizens of the Universe, was rejected and forgotten."
Carl Sagan (Cosmos, p188)


The popular nature gods of a millennium became the 'demons' of the Christians, infesting streams, forests, mountains and animals – and of course the temples and shrines of the pagans.

The Christians, if anything, feared the old gods more than the pagans, particularly as they preferred a diabolic rather than a natural explanation for mishaps and disasters. Far from exposing the old gods as merely wood and stone (the fate of Serapis in Alexandria, for example), most Christians of the 4th and 5th centuries invested the pagan deities with a new, and sinister, power. Instead of contempt, now only the utter extirpation of the old gods could make the world safe for Christians.


God's Domain

To a plague of malevolent spirits was added the chastising hand of the Lord himself. Unlike the humanoid and capricious old gods of Greece or Rome – in the main, getting on with their own bawdy lives – the 'true God' of the Christians was pervasively interventionist, knowing every human thought, 'looking into men's hearts,' and able to suspend natural law at will.

The course of nature could be anything God chose it to be; human 'knowledge' of natural causes could be overturned simply by God's decision to do things otherwise. In this brave New World Order, divine caprice and cosmic lawlessness had triumphed and rationality had died. All that remained was to glorify God and await his judgement.

Dave Lane
05-18-2011, 11:16 PM
A classic, 'I read it on the internet, therefore it's true.'

The Church never argued that the earth was square. In fact, most Church authorities would have held, as Aristotle did, that the world was round. Aristotle, by the way, was one of the key inspiration for the belief that the sun revolved around the earth, which the Church did defend.

Mapping the stars was not an idle leisure activity.

The lifeblood of Alexandria – as of other cities – was trade, particularly the export of grain and papyrus to the rest of the Mediterranean, and developments in astronomy allowed sailors to do away with the consultation of "oracles" and priests and be able to risk year-round navigation out of sight of the coast.

As early as 300 BC Aristarchus had argued for a heliocentric theory, a sun-centred universe, though many thinkers continued to support an earlier Aristotelian system which had the Earth at the centre of several 'spheres' – despite various observed 'anomalies' in the movement of the planets.

400 years after Aristarchus, Ptolemy worked out a system of 'epicycles' to explain away the irregularities and maintain the geocentric, Aristotelian view. The Christians seized upon this Ptolemaic system with relish and their thinking never moved beyond that point.

In the following centuries, mariners were forced, once more, to rely on "oracles" and the ship's Bible. Hazards of the sea consumed unfortunate sailors and, with so many cities in headlong decline, maritime trade collapsed.

Banned by church, it was the rediscovery of the heliocentric theory by Copernicus which got Galileo into trouble in the 1600s.

Count Zarth
05-18-2011, 11:38 PM
Mapping the stars was not an idle leisure activity.

The lifeblood of Alexandria – as of other cities – was trade, particularly the export of grain and papyrus to the rest of the Mediterranean, and developments in astronomy allowed sailors to do away with the consultation of "oracles" and priests and be able to risk year-round navigation out of sight of the coast.

As early as 300 BC Aristarchus had argued for a heliocentric theory, a sun-centred universe, though many thinkers continued to support an earlier Aristotelian system which had the Earth at the centre of several 'spheres' – despite various observed 'anomalies' in the movement of the planets.

400 years after Aristarchus, Ptolemy worked out a system of 'epicycles' to explain away the irregularities and maintain the geocentric, Aristotelian view. The Christians seized upon this Ptolemaic system with relish and their thinking never moved beyond that point.

In the following centuries, mariners were forced, once more, to rely on "oracles" and the ship's Bible. Hazards of the sea consumed unfortunate sailors and, with so many cities in headlong decline, maritime trade collapsed.

Banned by church, it was the rediscovery of the heliocentric theory by Copernicus which got Galileo into trouble in the 1600s.

The mountain wins agaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaain

Dave Lane
05-19-2011, 12:23 AM
Oh and Jenson it does appear you are wrestling with the magic and superstitions you have been studying. Take a step back and come back with a cynics eye and use the logic and knowledge you have gained.

You are intelligent enough to make the final leap of logic. Look at the universe and stars so numerous and distant that they are completely uncountable. Why? When all god would have needed was one star and one planet. Not even that really. Just some light from the sky and some food is all man needed. The answer is obvious once you look at it. Only one answer makes sense for any of our "gods" versus the natural world.

Jenson71
05-19-2011, 07:39 AM
nice edit....even though you really don't get to decide if that's true...just like you don't decide what my religion is. I've never claimed to be a Christian on this board.

known me for eight years? you know very little about me.

Are you a Christian?

Jenson71
05-19-2011, 07:42 AM
Oh and Jenson it does appear you are wrestling with the magic and superstitions you have been studying. Take a step back and come back with a cynics eye and use the logic and knowledge you have gained.

You are intelligent enough to make the final leap of logic. Look at the universe and stars so numerous and distant that they are completely uncountable. Why? When all god would have needed was one star and one planet. Not even that really. Just some light from the sky and some food is all man needed. The answer is obvious once you look at it. Only one answer makes sense for any of our "gods" versus the natural world.

The enormity of the universe is the final leap of logic to prove that God does not exist? That's a horrible reason.

patteeu
05-19-2011, 08:04 AM
I don't see how any of this, even if true, invalidates the writings in the Bible. If the Bible is inspired by God, what difference does it make if He moves it's authors to write in their own name or in the name of someone else?

And, on the other hand, if it's not inspired by God, what difference does it make whether it was forged or not?

stevieray
05-19-2011, 08:22 AM
Are you a Christian?

by whose standard?

let me put it this way, the only adjective on the front of my Church is Bible.

Jenson71
05-19-2011, 03:17 PM
by whose standard?

let me put it this way, the only adjective on the front of my Church is Bible.

You're Christian. Do you deny this?

Count Zarth
05-19-2011, 04:39 PM
I don't see how any of this, even if true, invalidates the writings in the Bible. If the Bible is inspired by God, what difference does it make if He moves it's authors to write in their own name or in the name of someone else?


http://static.neatoshop.com/images/product/68/468/Occams-Razor_1896-l.jpg

stevieray
05-19-2011, 09:15 PM
You're Christian. Do you deny this?

I am?

you sure seem to think so. why?

Jenson71
05-19-2011, 09:20 PM
I am?

you sure seem to think so. why?

Because you believe in the divinity of Jesus. You consider him your savior and that Jesus is God's only son. The Bible is your sacred scriptures.

Do you deny these?

Count Zarth
05-19-2011, 11:27 PM
Jenson is tossing and turning in bed right now trying to make sense of all the evidence that is slowly chipping away at the worldview imprinted onto his being by a lifetime of catholic brainwashing....

Slowly but surely....he will free himself from the shackles of "faith"

Jenson71
05-20-2011, 07:12 AM
Jenson is tossing and turning in bed right now trying to make sense of all the evidence that is slowly chipping away at the worldview imprinted onto his being by a lifetime of catholic brainwashing....

Slowly but surely....he will free himself from the shackles of "faith"

Maybe a few sessions of therapy with you will lead me to enlightenment.

Hydrae
05-20-2011, 07:42 AM
Maybe a few sessions of therapy with you will lead me to enlightenment.

I would be very careful making an offer like that with GC. I know I would worry about the "therapy." ;)

stevieray
05-20-2011, 04:22 PM
Because you believe in the divinity of Jesus. You consider him your savior and that Jesus is God's only son. The Bible is your sacred scriptures.

Do you deny these?


....those claims are made by you.

....but I'm curious, how did you arrive at this conclusion?

Jenson71
05-21-2011, 11:44 AM
....those claims are made by you.

....but I'm curious, how did you arrive at this conclusion?

Things you've said in the past. Can we get an affirmative response from you, like "I am a Christian" or "I believe in the divinity of Jesus" or "I hold to the words of the Nicene Creed" or are you having a good time? I think this dance act is something you might think is clever, but it's really just boring and pointless.

It's reasonable to think that if you're just skirting away from affirming those, then you are basically denying them.

stevieray
05-21-2011, 12:03 PM
Things you've said in the past.

It's reasonable to think that if you're just skirting away from affirming those, then you are basically denying them.

What that I've said in the past convinces you? According to you, thought my knowledge on the subject is embarrassing to others.

You've gone form telling me what my religion is and what I believe to I'm denying what you already said I am.

Jenson71
05-21-2011, 12:08 PM
What that I've said in the past convinces you? According to you, thought my knowledge on the subject is embarrassing to others.

You've gone form telling me what my religion is and what I believe to I'm denying what you already said I am.

You're not making much sense, and part of it is that you're a sloppy writer, which indicates to me that you're a sloppy thinker. I said you know little about the history of your religion (as much as gochiefs knows). I didn't say you weren't a Christian. It's possible to be a Christian, even a great Christian, and not know anything about the history of Christianity. I don't even think you're half aware of what the beliefs mean that you (might) profess in believing.

stevieray
05-21-2011, 12:17 PM
You're not making much sense, and part of it is that you're a sloppy writer, which indicates to me that you're a sloppy thinker. I said you know little about the history of your religion (as much as gochiefs knows). I didn't say you weren't a Christian. It's possible to be a Christian, even a great Christian, and not know anything about the history of Christianity. I don't even think you're half aware of what the beliefs mean that you (might) profess in believing.


awwww...

so, now I'm still a Christian even though you said it's safe to say I'm denying it?

no, I'm exposing what Christians do that turns everyone off. At your expense.

know what that is?

Jenson71
05-21-2011, 12:23 PM
awwww...

so, now I'm still a Christian even though you said it's safe to say I'm denying it?

no, I'm exposing what Christians do that turns everyone off. At your expense.

know what that is?

Continually evading the question might be seen as a denial, but I know your posting history and things you've said before on here, which indicates you're a Christian (or at least, a shadow of one).

For some reason, you thought it would be clever to bring some doubt into the mix, so I asked you straight up to either tell the board or not. You haven't done that yet, for what reason, I have no idea. But I don't think there's really any purpose to what you're doing aside from making yourself look as stupid and confused as you usually are. I'm sure in your mind, you have some grand sermon going on.

stevieray
05-21-2011, 12:34 PM
Continually evading the question might be seen as a denial, but I know your posting history and things you've said before on here, which indicates you're a Christian (or at least, a shadow of one).

For some reason, you thought it would be clever to bring some doubt into the mix, so I asked you straight up to either tell the board or not. You haven't done that yet, for what reason, I have no idea. But I don't think there's really any purpose to what you're doing aside from making yourself look as stupid and confused as you usually are. I'm sure in your mind, you have some grand sermon going on.

the only one I see preaching here is you.

feel free to keep on lashing out, says nothing about me or my faith.

Jenson71
05-21-2011, 12:37 PM
the only one I see preaching here is you.

feel free to keep on lashing out, says nothing about me or my faith.

No, but your continual refusing to answer anything while maintaining this ongoing argument says quite a bit about you.

stevieray
05-21-2011, 02:04 PM
.....maintaining this ongoing argument says quite a bit about you.

judge not, lest you be judged seems to apply here, outside of the irony of the statement.

let's recap, shall we?

what started your posting aneurysm is when I stated was that's just man adding or taking the from the Bible.


...then you labled me ignorant of the history of "my" religion...which is funny and again ironic, because later you stated someone didn't have to know the history of Christianity to be a Christian(incorrect, btw.)..if someone doesn't need to know the history, why does it matter to you?...you then attempted to make me claim Christianity as "my" religion, and when I didn't, say it's logical that I'm somehow denying it...again ironic, because you stated you know I'm a Christian because of the things I've posted.

In other words, my posts make me Christian, without having to procliam it to the board. works for me.

IMO, the real issue, as demonstrated by your numeorus insults to me and others over this subject, is the same thing it's always been for you. Taking the knowledge you've received in your education and using it to demean others and prop yourself up in some twisted self worship, probably thinking it makes you better.

...just like the Sanhedrin, too consumed with the Letter of the Law and using it to persecute, instead of embracing the Spirit of the Law.

The Mad Crapper
05-21-2011, 02:57 PM
http://www.dallasvoice.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/tye.jpg

Jenson71
05-21-2011, 03:23 PM
judge not, lest you be judged seems to apply here, outside of the irony of the statement.

let's recap, shall we?

what started your posting aneurysm is when I stated was that's just man adding or taking the from the Bible.

Which is the whole problem: your derision for the Catholic Church stems from your deeply-seeded ignorance. Someone throws out a fact: The Church did x. You implicitly acknowledge it as factual, then blame the Church for "adding" to the Bible.

I call you out on it, then you do your little song and dance about being or not being a Christian.

You don't get it. You're posting a whole lot of absurdities. There's the recap. The essential points: 1) You're ignorant 2) You're close-minded 3) You don't know what you're talking about

The Mad Crapper
05-21-2011, 03:40 PM
Which is the whole problem: your derision for the Catholic Church stems from your deeply-seeded ignorance. Someone throws out a fact: The Church did x. You implicitly acknowledge it as factual, then blame the Church for "adding" to the Bible.

I call you out on it, then you do your little song and dance about being or not being a Christian.

You don't get it. You're posting a whole lot of absurdities. There's the recap. The essential points: 1) You're ignorant 2) You're close-minded 3) You don't know what you're talking about

http://www.dallasvoice.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/tye.jpg

stevieray
05-21-2011, 05:26 PM
Which is the whole problem: your derision for the Catholic Church stems from your deeply-seeded ignorance. Someone throws out a fact: The Church did x. You implicitly acknowledge it as factual, then blame the Church for "adding" to the Bible.

I call you out on it, then you do your little song and dance about being or not being a Christian.

You don't get it. You're posting a whole lot of absurdities. There's the recap. The essential points: 1) You're ignorant 2) You're close-minded 3) You don't know what you're talking about


:LOL:

Jenson71
05-21-2011, 06:28 PM
I suppose laughing is about the only defense mechanism you have. You certainly can't type out a thought to save your life.

The day you show some 'spirit of the law' on here will be the first for you.

stevieray
05-21-2011, 07:16 PM
I suppose laughing is about the only defense mechanism you have. You certainly can't type out a thought to save your life.

The day you show some 'spirit of the law' on here will be the first for you.


no you just keep proving me right....

it's humorous, but in a sad kind of way, considering you always end up being reduced to personal attacks.

again, say what you want, doesn't say anything about me or my faith...for some odd reason, you seem think your stamp is the approval.

man, that sounds familiar....:hmmm:

Mr. Kotter
05-22-2011, 12:06 AM
Dang it, it's May 22nd, the doom-sayers were "off".....just sayin'...heh. LMAO

Taco John
05-22-2011, 02:08 AM
No, they weren't terrified of popes.

Yes the were. Government is always terrified of religion. Religion makes up unique citizenry of it own that crosses borders and creates vast amounts of political power. You fail to recognize Constantine's grandest vision. The Catholic Church has been one of the most powerful body politics in the world, if not the most powerful through the course of history.

Jenson71
05-22-2011, 09:17 AM
Yes the were. Government is always terrified of religion. Religion makes up unique citizenry of it own that crosses borders and creates vast amounts of political power. You fail to recognize Constantine's grandest vision. The Catholic Church has been one of the most powerful body politics in the world, if not the most powerful through the course of history.

No, they weren't. Because your historical knowledge comes entirely from theories in your own head, I'm not really interested in hearing them.

Jenson71
05-22-2011, 09:19 AM
no you just keep proving me right....

it's humorous, but in a sad kind of way, considering you always end up being reduced to personal attacks.

again, say what you want, doesn't say anything about me or my faith...for some odd reason, you seem think your stamp is the approval.

man, that sounds familiar....:hmmm:

The next time you want to accuse the Church of believing in something, make sure you know what you're talking about, otherwise, I will call you out on it.

The Mad Crapper
05-22-2011, 09:28 AM
I suppose laughing is about the only defense mechanism you have. You certainly can't type out a thought to save your life.

The day you show some 'spirit of the law' on here will be the first for you.

http://www.dallasvoice.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/tye.jpg

Dave Lane
05-22-2011, 09:45 AM
Yes the were. Government is always terrified of religion. Religion makes up unique citizenry of it own that crosses borders and creates vast amounts of political power. You fail to recognize Constantine's grandest vision. The Catholic Church has been one of the most powerful body politics in the world, if not the most powerful through the course of history.

This is true to a degree. There were occasions when leaders and kings stood up to the church. My favorite being Louis the IV marching into Rome and driving out the pope for heresy and establishing his own pope.

Avignon seem to be the place for disposed popes and the influence of the church declined during this time and in a real sense helped usher in the renaissance.

Jenson71
05-22-2011, 09:49 AM
Avignon seem to be the place for disposed popes and the influence of the church declined during this time and in a real sense helped usher in the reformation.

Fixed your post, but, correct. The debacle of Avignon dramatically cut the Church's influence down, very understandably.

The Mad Crapper
05-22-2011, 09:49 AM
Avignon seem to be the place for disposed popes and the influence of the church declined during this time and in a real sense helped usher in the renaissance.

LMAO

stevieray
05-23-2011, 07:39 AM
The next time you want to accuse the Church of believing in something, make sure you know what you're talking about, otherwise, I will call you out on it.

I'll perceive the Catholic Church in whatever manner I choose.

Has nothing to do with you.

Dave Lane
05-23-2011, 07:49 AM
Fixed your post, but, correct. The debacle of Avignon dramatically cut the Church's influence down, very understandably.

Then we shall have agree to disagree. While the reformation was obviously influenced by the Popes removal to Avignon the real benefit of the lessening of the church's power was the ability of non-christian thinking to be revived without the full power of the church to stifle it.

While engaged in trying to stop Luther the church's gaze was elsewhere and science, logic and free thinking was able to become established once again. Very fortunately, the church was unable to get the genie back in the bottle despite torture, executions and dramatic trials.

Jenson71
05-23-2011, 05:01 PM
I'll perceive the Catholic Church in whatever manner I choose.

Has nothing to do with you.

And I'll confront you on your errors. You're just not going to get by with making things up in whatever manner you choose.

It has everything to do with the truth. If this is a problem for you, then learn something.

Jenson71
05-23-2011, 05:05 PM
Then we shall have agree to disagree. While the reformation was obviously influenced by the Popes removal to Avignon the real benefit of the lessening of the church's power was the ability of non-christian thinking to be revived without the full power of the church to stifle it.

While engaged in trying to stop Luther the church's gaze was elsewhere and science, logic and free thinking was able to become established once again. Very fortunately, the church was unable to get the genie back in the bottle despite torture, executions and dramatic trials.

The Renaissance was before the Reformation, and it was endorsed, sponsored, promoted by the Catholic Church. You're throwing out a lot of historical mush. You might be trying to make an argument for the explosion of science and rationalism after the counter-reformation and religious wars, by as it stands, you're not making much sense.

Here's a little timeline:

early 14th-early 15th c: Avignon/Schism: Church influence significantly declines
mid 15th c: Renaissance: Church influence recovers some, explosion of culture, art, humanism throughout Western World
early 16th c: Reformation: Church influence busts into a thousand pieces
mid 16th c: Counter-Reformation, Religious Wars: Church attempts to scoop up all the lost pieces, recovering in part, but Christian world remains divided and begins fighting
late 16th c: People angry at Christians fighting, scientific revolution begins

Brock
05-23-2011, 05:23 PM
The Renaissance was before the Reformation, and it was endorsed, sponsored, promoted by the Catholic Church. You're throwing out a lot of historical mush.

LOL.

stevieray
05-23-2011, 11:26 PM
And I'll confront you on your errors. You're just not going to get by with making things up in whatever manner you choose.

It has everything to do with the truth. If this is a problem for you, then learn something.

not going to get by? lol, ok dad.

you don't decide what truth is for others.

if tha't s a problem for you....that's unfortunate, but still your problem.

Jenson71
05-24-2011, 07:06 AM
not going to get by? lol, ok dad.

you don't decide what truth is for others.

if tha't s a problem for you....that's unfortunate, but still your problem.

You believe that gochief's post was accurate, right? You implied that it was, then added that the Church erred because they were adding to the Bible.

Gochief's post contained several statements. One of them, most easily dealt with, was this: "Another famous suppression of scientific advance created by the church was the belief that the earth was round."

That statement is either true or it is not. It is not an opinion. There is a conflict between one person saying that that statement is true, and another saying that that statement is false.

Your opinion is that man added to the Bible, but it is based upon false statements, and that makes your opinion irrelevant. Find something true, then form an opinion, and I won't be able to knock it down.

Here's a helpful reminder: anything that gochiefs posts about religion, take it with a skeptical eye, because it's probably wrong or ignorant. Do not, as you did, accept its truth and then try to make up an excuse for it.

Another helpful reminder: anytime you think it might be a good idea to get an argument with me about anything, stop, and say "Jenson71, you are right" instead.

stevieray
05-24-2011, 07:19 AM
You believe that gochief's post was accurate, right? You implied that it was, then added that the Church erred because they were adding to the Bible.

Gochief's post contained several statements. One of them, most easily dealt with, was this: "Another famous suppression of scientific advance created by the church was the belief that the earth was round."

That statement is either true or it is not. It is not an opinion. There is a conflict between one person saying that that statement is true, and another saying that that statement is false.

Your opinion is that man added to the Bible, but it is based upon false statements, and that makes your opinion irrelevant. Find something true, then form an opinion, and I won't be able to knock it down.

LMAO

again, you don't decide what is true for others...sorry you can't handle that...maybe you can go to confession and a Priest can absolve your sin by telling you to pray to Mary.

Jenson71
05-24-2011, 07:22 AM
LMAO

again, you don't decide what is true for others...sorry you can't handle that...maybe you can go to confession and a Priest can absolve your sin by telling you to pray to Mary.

Again, this is more ignorance. Catholics don't pray to Mary.

And I agree, I don't decide what is true for anyone. It either is true or is not. The statement that "The Church added to the Bible by saying that the world was flat" is false for everyone.

Jaric
05-24-2011, 08:15 AM
I think he was refering to saying a "Hail Mary"