There is no evidence for God, so why do you believe?

[ElishaElijah]

You're posting to unbelievers. They Bible is not authoritative.

The Bible is authoritative just not on RF for some reason.

 

[ElishaElijah]

You seem to be unable to project yourself into the heads of others, to see through their eyes. You seem unaware that they believe differently from you, that they see your opinions as only opinions and often wrong ones, and your scriptures as only the words of ancient men. That seems odd to me

You said you were a Christian so what I’m saying should not be foreign to you, you’re saying you were part of the Body of Christ yet confused about the Bible and the fundamentals of the faith.

 

[ElishaElijah]

Rubbish, this is demonstrably false. We have countless examples of people who were once Christians and are now atheists, so claiming this can't happen is absurd. Dr Bart Ehrman is a pretty good example.

You know Bart Ehrman was born again and other atheists? You have objective evidence or are you taking their word for it?

 

[ElishaElijah]

I've been baptised, I was 14, imaginary afterlife torture chambers are no more scary, just because I was too young to to know any better and fight back.

This kind of biblical rationale is hardly that surprising, a lot of it is based on fear and phycological bullying.

Baptism is a voluntary ritual and identifying with Christ as Romans 6 describes, after a person has received Christ and is born again. I also was baptized at 13 but wasn’t saved until 28. I just went through confirmation but there wasn’t any change until I was saved and born again.

“What should we say then? Should we continue in sin so that grace may multiply? Absolutely not! How can we who died to sin still live in it? Or are you unaware that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? Therefore we were buried with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we too may walk in newness of life. For if we have been united with him in the likeness of his death, we will certainly also be in the likeness of his resurrection. For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body ruled by sin might be rendered powerless so that we may no longer be enslaved to sin, since a person who has died is freed from sin. Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him, because we know that Christ, having been raised from the dead, will not die again. Death no longer rules over him. For the death he died, he died to sin once for all time; but the life he lives, he lives to God. So, you too consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭6:1-11‬ ‭CSB‬‬

Did you make this decision when you were baptized that you were dead to sin and alive to Christ? You willingly go into the waters of baptism to die to yourself and live for God. United with Christ in the likeness of His death and raised in newness of life? This is what baptism means

 

[samtonga43]

In this video Carrier goes through a recent conversation Ehrman had on a podcast about mythicism and other issues.
Ehrman is a good scholar but when it comes to this one issue he's acting weird and not making sense and Carrier is showing his errors.
Ehrmans book How Jesus Became God is really good. But his comments on mythicism are bizarre and he's avoiding updating himself on the scholarship. His career is based on historicity (Jesus was a man mythicized in the Gospel stories) so it might be weird for him to look at the issue honestly?
Carrier makes some good points here.

I actually watched all of this

I've been baptised, I was 14, imaginary afterlife torture chambers are no more scary, just because I was too young to to know any better and fight back.

This kind of biblical rationale is hardly that surprising, a lot of it is based on fear and phycological bullying.

You are absolutely right, Sheldon. Atrocious behaviour.

 

[joelr]

That’s the deception, first of all, you were not ever a Christian if you’re saying Jesus is a myth. A Christian is someone who has repented of their sin, received the gift of eternal life through Jesus Christ. Been born again of the Holy Spirit. This is God’s Spirit and sets people apart, He comes from God and lives in me and all believers. That’s the difference. We received from God, something you know nothing about.

Yup did all those things. And more. Received God. Had all the same experiences. Myths will create those effects when you think they are real.
Decided to see of my beliefs were true and they were not.
Then I met a Muslim and she gave me the same apologetics. Allah "lived in her", spoke to her through emotion and she knew in her heart that Islam was indeed the correct religion. Except it isn't. Then a Hindu said pretty much all the same. Personal experiences, know in my heart, Krishna speaks to me every day.....

Now you only defense mechanism is to say "oh you were not a real believer"...except you don't know so that is fallacy #1.
#2 is you are basically trying to say only people indoctrinated with belief and continue to de deluded by false belief are Christian.
Yes you are set apart. So are Muslims, so are Hindu. They all have emotional attachments to things that are not likely true

Again, salvation wasn't a thing in the OT. Only after the Greek occupation was salvation, souls, heaven, savior Gods a thing. Those are myths from Hellenism. People in all religions get the same feelings and have the same personal experiences. You already know the people claiming a personal relationship with other Gods are just creating the feelings in their mind.
Well so are you. You need evidence. You haven't presented any. Just claims. The same claims used by all religions.

Bart Ehrman is another, born again, fundamentalist Christian. Became a historian and realized the stories are not true.
Same with Matt Dillahunty, studying to be a Baptist Minister, investigated if his beliefs were justified, they were not.

You have theories, we have this treasure in jars of clay as the Bible says. The Holy Spirit bears witness of God
and confirms we are His.
So, no you don’t have a clue, you’ve read but lack
understanding.

They are not theories. It is certain that Judaism did not have savior demigods, did not teach people they had souls that through redemption can get to heaven (which is now for everyone, not just God). But the Greeks did. This is not in question. During the Greek and Persian occupation Judaism incorporated those myths into late Judaism and Christianity. That is fact. In fact early Christian apologists had to tell people that Jesus seemed like all the other common Gods because the devil went back in time and made all the other religions look exactly like Christianity to fool people.

"
Early apologists admited similarities and blamed them on Satan.

Even allowing for these caveats, it is clear that substantial ideological and ritual similarities did exist. In fact they were sufficiently obvious to the early Christian apologists that they felt obliged to offer some explanation for them, particularly since, to their embarrassment, it was clear that the Mystery rituals predated their own. The most common explanation, offered by many Christian apologists including Firmicus Maternus, Tertullian and Justin Martyr, was that demons had deliberately prefigured Christian sacraments in order to lead people astray. This explanation has sufficed for Christians over countless centuries, and indeed scholastic bias towards the assumed uniqueness, primacy and superiority of Christianity is one of the major methodological pitfalls encountered by those engaged in the comparative study of Christianity and the Mysteries. Many Christian scholars have been so certain that Christianity alone, of all the world’s religions, is an original and unique revelation that at times it seems that they might almost prefer the “demonic intervention” explanation to the unthinkable
possibility that Christianity was influenced by its philosophical and theological environs. "
"
-The idea that a human could become one with God and share in his “risen” life is even more inconceivable. It is difficult to see how these ideas in particular could have entered the mind set of early Christians had they not, at the very least, been drawing on the ideas and symbols of the Pagan religions around them."
-"
-It is interesting that the term which Paul uses to describe the sufferings of Christ, παθηματα, is also that which, according to Firmicus Maternus, was used in the rites of Osiris to describe the suffering of that deity which also leads to salvation, “Be of good cheer, neophytes, seeing that the god is saved, for we also, after our toils, shall find salvation.

"
The Relationship between Hellenistic Mystery Religions and Early Christianity:

A Case Study using Baptism and Eucharist



Jennifer Uzzell


Christianity summed up -

"
-the seasonal drama was homologized to a soteriology (salvation concept) concerning the destiny, fortune, and salvation of the individual after death.
"
-his led to a change from concern for a religion of national prosperity to one for individual salvation, from focus on a particular ethnic group to concern for every human. The prophet or saviour replaced the priest and king as the chief religious figure.


-his process was carried further through the identification of the experiences of the soul that was to be saved with the vicissitudes of a divine but fallen soul, which had to be redeemed by cultic activity and divine intervention. This view is illustrated in the concept of the paradoxical figure of the saved saviour, salvator salvandus.


-Other deities, who had previously been associated with national destiny (e.g., Zeus, Yahweh, and Isis), were raised to the status of transcendent, supreme

Your feelings don't demonstrate the truth. Does a Hindu who says they have recieved Krishna and that he is their personal savior mean it's true? No.

You have bought into something that is not true and you have to give evidence, not claims and personal experience?

 

[joelr]

Peter Williams
Qualifications:
M.A. (Cantab); M.Phil. (Cantab); Ph.D. (Cantab).
History:
Senior Lecturer in New Testament, University of Aberdeen, 2005-2007
Lecturer in New Testament, University of Aberdeen, 2003-2005
Research Fellow in Old Testament, Tyndale House, Cambridge, 1998-2003
Affiliated Lecturer in Hebrew and Aramaic, Faculty of Oriental Studies, University of Cambridge, 1998-2003
Research Assistant, the Semantics of Ancient Hebrew Database Project, Faculty of Divinity, University of Cambridge, 1997-1998
Currently:
Principal, Tyndale House, Cambridge

Josh Bowen?
An Assyriologist

Ok that was useless? First what is his degree? Lecturer? But he doesn't talk about slavery????????? He's talking about GENESIS which is consensus that it's a Mesopotamian borrowed myth? This was about slavery?

Now Bowen is an expert in Hebrew and clears up what is being said in Leviticus.

At 108:56 the apologists are trying to say the slavery is servatude. Bowen explains what the Hebrew actually means in context using lexicography.


Genesis?
Religion Identity and the Origins of Ancient Israel.


KL Sparks, PhD Hebrew Bible, Baptist Pastor,


As a rule, modern scholars do not believe that the Bible’s account of early Israel’s history provides a wholly accurate portrait of Israels origins. One reason for this is that the earliest part of Israel’s history in Genesis is now regarded as something other than a work of modern history. It’s primary author was at best an ancient historian (if a historian at all) who lived long after the events he narrated, and who drew freely from sources that were not historical (legends and theological stories), he was more concerned with theology than with the modern quest to learn “what actually happened” (Van Seters 1992; Sparks 2002 pp. 37-71)

"
Based on scientific interpretation of archaeological, genetic, and linguistic evidence, most scholars consider Genesis to be primarily mythological rather than historical.

"

Van Seeters and Davies. But this is the opinion of Thompson, OT Professor Fransesca Stravopolou and all historians?



All Biblical scholars who focus on historicity speak about the Mesopotamian and Babylonian influences on Genesis. All across the field. This stuff isn't up for debate in academia. It's the ONLY evidence. Here are quotes from 2 scholars:


-Nahum Mattathias Sarna was a modern biblical scholar who is best known for the study of Genesis and Exodus represented in his Understanding Genesis and in his contributions to the first two volumes of the JPS Torah Commentary.


-Wilfred George Lambert FBA was a historian and archaeologist, a specialist in Assyriology and Near Eastern Archaeology.


-It expounds themes parallel to those in Mesopotamian mythology, emphasizing the Israelite people's belief in one God.

-Scholars do not consider Genesis to be historically accurate.

-Although tradition attributes Genesis to Moses, biblical scholars hold that it, together with the following four books (making up what Jews call the Torah and biblical scholars call the Pentateuch), is "a composite work, the product of many hands and periods.

-hypothesis among biblical scholars today is that the first major comprehensive draft of the Pentateuch was composed in the late 7th or the 6th century BCE

-Comparative mythology provides historical and cross-cultural perspectives for Jewish mythology. Both sources behind the Genesis creation narrative borrowed themes from Mesopotamian mythology,[

-Genesis 1–11 as a whole is imbued with Mesopotamian myths.

-Genesis 2 has close parallels with a second Mesopotamian myth, the Atra-Hasis epic – parallels that in fact extend throughout Genesis 2–11, from the Creation to the Flood and its aftermath.

 

[joelr]

The New Testament is the Old Testament revealed. The Holy Spirit was showing us how Jesus fulfilled all that was written about Him. God had been showing the prophets what He was going to do in the future, the Jews were looking for Him but many didn’t recognize Him when He came

I don't think you were prepared for an actual debate. All you do is make claims. Baseless claims about ancient stories.
Historians know that Mark was writing the gospel USING THE OT AS A GUIDE. We see re-workings of several narratives, Kings, Psalms, sometimes verbatim.
Mark is writing a fictional narrative about the messianic savior that was predicted. It's complete fiction. Almost 100% of his gospel is re-writes of known sources and he's writing using a fictive literary style. Ring structure, chisasmus, no sources, improbable events, Jesus scores as high as Kibg Arthur on the Rank Ragalin mythotype scale. Mark lets us know it's fiction by having the main character say he teaches in. parables. You cannot get more fictive.

So OF COURSE he has a messianic prophecy fulfilled. All of the savior cults probably had prophecies which later a gospel was written to make it come true? These myths are not Christian. They are Greek myths adopted by Christian writers.


I could quote passages from the Quran back at you. Would that make them real? No. You have zero argument here. Telling us about the fiction you have bought into doesn't make it real.

 

[joelr]

I actually watched all of this

Well then is Ehrman not behaving oddly when it comes to the subject of Mythicism? There is something going on there. Ehrman's career is based on historicity and it seems like he's refusing to look at Carriers actual position and debunking older versions of mythicism. I suspect he feels Carrier has some good points.

 

[joelr]

You know Bart Ehrman was born again and other atheists? You have objective evidence or are you taking their word for it?

Ehrman stated he was "born again", and it's written here:

Born on October 5, 1955, Ehrman grew up in Lawrence, Kansas, and attended Lawrence High School, where he was on the state champion debate team in 1973. He began studying the Bible, biblical theology, and biblical languages at Moody Bible Institute,[2] where he earned the school's three-year diploma in 1976.[3] He is a 1978 graduate of Wheaton College in Illinois, where he received his bachelor's degree. He received his PhD (in 1985) and MDiv from Princeton Theological Seminary, where he studied textual criticism of the Bible, development of the New Testament canon and New Testament apocrypha under Bruce Metzger. Both baccalaureate and doctorate were conferred magna cum laude.[4]


Ehrman was raised in an Anglican family and was originally a member of the Episcopal Church of the United States; as a teenager, he became a born-again evangelical.[2][5][6] In Misquoting Jesus, he recounts being certain in his youthful enthusiasm that God had inspired the wording of the Bible and protected its texts from all error.[2][5] His desire to understand the original words of the Bible led him to enroll in the Moody Bible Institute and Wheaton College, where he received a three-year diploma and a bachelor's degree.

He later became a student at the Princeton Theological Seminary, where he studied ancient languages, particularly Koine Greek, and textual criticism. During such studies at Princeton, however, he became convinced that there are contradictions and discrepancies in the biblical manuscripts that could not be harmonized or reconciled:[2]

He stated on a news show that he had become "born again"

 

[joelr]

Baptism is a voluntary ritual and identifying with Christ as Romans 6 describes, after a person has received Christ and is born again. I also was baptized at 13 but wasn’t saved until 28. I just went through confirmation but there wasn’t any change until I was saved and born again.

“What should we say then? Should we continue in sin so that grace may multiply? Absolutely not! How can we who died to sin still live in it? Or are you unaware that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? Therefore we were buried with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we too may walk in newness of life. For if we have been united with him in the likeness of his death, we will certainly also be in the likeness of his resurrection. For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body ruled by sin might be rendered powerless so that we may no longer be enslaved to sin, since a person who has died is freed from sin. Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him, because we know that Christ, having been raised from the dead, will not die again. Death no longer rules over him. For the death he died, he died to sin once for all time; but the life he lives, he lives to God. So, you too consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭6:1-11‬ ‭CSB‬‬

Did you make this decision when you were baptized that you were dead to sin and alive to Christ? You willingly go into the waters of baptism to die to yourself and live for God. United with Christ in the likeness of His death and raised in newness of life? This is what baptism means

We also know where baptism is originally from.

Baptism has been widely compared with initiation into the Mystery cults. In many of the Mysteries purification through ritual bathing was required as a prerequisite for initiation.



It is interesting to note that the early Christian writer Tertullian (c. 160-225CE) would not have agreed with this appraisal. Not only did he believe that certain of the Mysteries practiced baptism, but also that they did so in hope of attaining forgiveness of sins and a new birth. This was so striking a similarity that it clearly demanded some form of explanation. Not surprisingly, demonic imitation was the culprit.

The Nations, who are strangers to all understandings of spiritual powers, ascribe to their idols the imbuing of waters with the self-same efficacy. But they cheat themselves with waters that are widowed. For washing is the channel through which they are initiated into some sacred rites...of some notorious Isis or Mithras...at the Appolianrian or Eleusinian games they are baptised and they presume that the effect of their doing is their regeneration and the remission of the penalties due to their perjuries.

Another area where some have seen a link between Christian baptism and the Mystery


-It appears then that the Mysteries asserted an influence over Christianity from the very earliest days and were a part of its development and evolution rather than being “tacked on” at a later date. There was never a “pure” form of Christianity which was later “corrupted” by the language and ritual of the Mystery Cults as Christianity was assimilated by the Greek world; rather Christianity grew up in a world where the language and motifs we associate with the Mysteries were a common intellectual currency. There is no reason to suppose that they did not form an integral part of Christianity from the very beginning despite its Jewish heritage.

-It is interesting that the term which Paul uses to describe the sufferings of Christ, παθηματα, is also that which, according to Firmicus Maternus, was used in the rites of Osiris to describe the suffering of that deity which also leads to salvation, “Be of good cheer, neophytes, seeing that the god is saved, for we also, after our toils, shall find salvation.



The Relationship between Hellenistic Mystery Religions and Early Christianity:

A Case Study using Baptism and Eucharist



Jennifer Uzzel

 

[joelr]

Jesus said how a person becomes a believer and Christian is a term that was given to believers in the book of Acts. It is clear what Jesus says and not a belief but clearly stated. You cry bully, but the people saying they were once Christian are now saying God is a myth, this is impossible according to the Bible. You never knew Him, never born again so never a Christian.

Show where scripture says one can never learn the religion is false?
However, IT'S THE BIBLE???? Of course it will make all sorts of ridiculous claims about belief and non-belief.
In fact, the Quran says you also cannot trust non-believers, Allah will ignore them and theirs will be a painful doom (you)

Surah 3
THE FAMILY OF IMRAN ('Imran)


And believe not save in one who followeth your religion - Say (O Muhammad): Lo! the guidance is Allah's Guidance - that anyone is given the like of that which was given unto you or that they may argue with you in the presence of their Lord. Say (O Muhammad): Lo! the bounty is in Allah's hand. He bestoweth it on whom He will. Allah is All-Embracing, All-Knowing.

74 He selecteth for His mercy whom He will. Allah is of Infinite Bounty.

75 Among the People of the Scripture there is he who, if thou trust him with a weight of treasure, will return it to thee. And among them there is he who, if thou trust him with a piece of gold, will not return it to thee unless thou keep standing over him. That is because they say: We have no duty to the Gentiles. They speak a lie concerning Allah knowingly.

76 Nay, but (the chosen of Allah is) he who fulfilleth his pledge and wardeth off (evil); for lo! Allah loveth those who ward off (evil).

Don't believe anyone who isn't a Muslim.

77 Lo! those who purchase a small gain at the cost of Allah's covenant and their oaths, they have no portion in the Hereafter. Allah will neither speak to them nor look upon them on the Day of Resurrection, nor will He make them grow. Theirs will be a painful doom.




Also the worst thing one can do is make lies about Allah (say it isn't true)

18:15 These, our people, have chosen (other) gods beside Him though they bring no clear warrant (vouchsafed) to them. And who doth greater wrong than he who inventeth a lie concerning Allah ?



A few more scripture about non-believers: (hell, death, a painful doom)



Surah 3: Intolerance

1. Those who disbelieve the revelations of Allah, theirs will be a heavy doom. 3:4
2. Those who disbelieve will be fuel for the Fire. 3:10
3. Those who disbelieve shall be overcome and gathered unto Hell. 3:12
4. Non-muslims will be punished by Allah for their nonbelief. 3:19
5. "If they surrender, then truly they are rightly guided, and if they turn away, then it is thy duty only to convey the message."
   (The message for those who won't surrender is "you're going to hell.") 3:20
6. Those who disbelieve, promise them a painful doom. 3:21
7. "They [Christians and Jews] say: The Fire will not touch us save for a certain number of days. That which they used to invent hath deceived them regarding their religion." (The Fire will burn them forever.) 3:24
8. Let not the believers take disbelievers for their friends in preference to believers. 3:28
9. Allah loveth not the disbelievers. 3:32
10. Allah will punish disbelievers in this world and the next. They will have no helpers. 3:56
11. Don't believe anyone who is not a Muslim. 3:73
12. "Allah will neither speak to them nor look upon them on the Day of Resurrection, nor will He make them grow. Theirs will be a painful doom." 3:77
13. All non-Muslims will be rejected by Allah after they die. 3:85

See, anyone can make these claims.
Now guess what? You don't buy any of this. Well your book isn't any different. Mythical claims that cannot be demonstrated to be true.

 

[joelr]

Clear what the Bible says:
“Of this salvation the prophets have inquired and searched carefully, who prophesied of the grace that would come to you, searching what, or what manner of time, the Spirit of Christ who was in them was indicating when He testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow. To them it was revealed that, not to themselves, but to us they were ministering the things which now have been reported to you through those who have preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven—things which angels desire to look into.”
‭‭I Peter‬ ‭1:10-12‬ ‭NKJV‬‬
“And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he inquired of them where the Christ was to be born. So they said to him, “In Bethlehem of Judea, for thus it is written by the prophet: ‘But you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, Are not the least among the rulers of Judah; For out of you shall come a Ruler Who will shepherd My people Israel.’ ””
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭2:4-6‬ ‭NKJV‬‬
“When the Day of Pentecost had fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven, as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting. But Peter, standing up with the eleven, raised his voice and said to them, “Men of Judea and all who dwell in Jerusalem, let this be known to you, and heed my words. For these are not drunk, as you suppose, since it is only the third hour of the day. But this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel: ‘And it shall come to pass in the last days, says God, That I will pour out of My Spirit on all flesh; Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, Your young men shall see visions, Your old men shall dream dreams. And on My menservants and on My maidservants I will pour out My Spirit in those days; And they shall prophesy. I will show wonders in heaven above And signs in the earth beneath: Blood and fire and vapor of smoke. The sun shall be turned into darkness, And the moon into blood, Before the coming of the great and awesome day of the Lord. And it shall come to pass That whoever calls on the name of the Lord Shall be saved.’”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭2:1-2, 14-21‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

And it continues today, God has told us ahead of time and prophecy is being fulfilled now as we approach the return of Jesus Christ.

Whether you want to believe the Scriptures or not is up to you but at least be honest about what it actually says and means.

Acts? We know what it says. Historians have demonstrated Acts is absolutely 100% historical fiction.


The Mystery of Acts: Unraveling Its Story Richard Purvoe (American biblical scholar, former Episcopal priest, and Fellow of the Westar Institute. Specialist on Acts)

The author of Acts unwittingly committed a near-perfect crime: He told his story so well that all rival accounts vanished with but the faintest of traces. And thus future generations were left with no documents that recount the history of the early Christian tradition; because Acts is not history. According to Richard Pervo, 'Acts is a beautiful house that readers may happily admire, but it is not a home in which the historian can responsibly live.' Luke did not even aspire to write history but rather told his story to defend the gentile communities of his day as the legitimate heirs of Israelite religion. In The Mystery of Acts, Pervo explores the problem of history in Acts by asking, and answering, the fundamental questions: Who wrote Acts? Where was Acts written? When was Acts written? Why was Acts written? How was Acts written? The result is a veritable tour-de-force that enlighten, entertains, and brings Acts to life.

Pervo writes with verve and has a commanding knowledge of the literature on Acts, and his assessment of the theological intent of Acts is informative. --The Bible Today

Richard Pervo, who has dedicated most of his scholarly life to the study of Acts, is an international authority in this area. His new book is intended specifically to introduce the non-specialist to recent research in the field by focusing on the problems of attempting to derive history from the text; indeed, Pervo appreciates the author of Acts more as a creative catechist than as an historian.

-This is the most important book I have read in five years. Bravo Pervo! Summarizing the discoveries made during the writing of his magisterial commentary on Acts, this little book makes it wonderfully clear that there is little if anything of historical value in the book of Acts, apart from what it can tell us about the community that wrote it. In one fell swoop, the only basis of support for the traditional model of Christian origins has been eliminated. It is now possible to entertain seriously other models of Christian origins, including the theory that Christianity did not begin at any particular place in space or moment in time, but rather began like the ancient religions of Egypt, India, Greece, and Rome. The fact that as soon as the curtain goes up on the stage of Christian history there is evidence of division and "heresies" such as Docetism--inexplicable on the basis of traditional notions of an historical "Jesus of Nazareth"--now becomes understandable if "Christianity" developed (and continues to develop) as the intertwining of threads of religious tradition into braids of tradition that change as time goes on. The origins of some threads disappear into the mists of prehistory, others enter the braid at known points in time and space. Some threads leave the braid, the braid fragments into various "Christianities," and the color of the various threads may change as a function of time and place.




As we can see, in order for Acts to be any kind of history, one would have to assume that all of these parallels are merely historical coincidences which is orders of magnitude less probable than that they are simply inventions that were intentionally created to reflect one another. It’s certainly possible for a couple of these coincidences to be historical, but it is nigh impossible for all of them to be historical. Either way, there isn’t any way to weed out any of the possible historical details from within this plethora of fictional constructions. Overall, Acts just shares far too many features with popular adventure novels that were written during the same period, in order to lend it any trust as history. Here’s an overview of those features:

1) They all promote a particular god or religion.
2) They are all travel narratives.
3) They all involve miraculous or amazing events.
4) They all include encounters with fabulous or exotic people.
5) They often incorporate a theme of chaste couples that are separated and then reunited.
6) They all feature exciting narratives of captivities and escapes.
7) They often include themes of persecution.
8) They often include episodes involving excited crowds.
9) They often involve divine rescues from danger.
10) They often have divine revelations which are integral to the plot

Since Acts shares all of these features and thus looks exactly like an ancient novel of the period, there is simply no good reason to assume that all of the parallels it has with other literary sources are merely historical coincidences. Rather, we should conclude that they are in fact what they have been shown to be: literary constructs and other elements of fiction.

 

[joelr]

The Bible is authoritative just not on RF for some reason.

The Bible is authoritative to people who buy into the stories.
The Quran is authoritative to people who buy into those stories.
The Mormon upgrades and the Bahai upgrades by revelation are authoritative to people who buy those stories.
Stories about alien abductions and crashes at Roswell are authoritative to people who buy into that lore.

Stories are not true because people believe them. If you grew up in an Islamic State you would probable be preaching how the Quran is the true word of Allah.
None of any of that is real. They are made-up tales.

 

[Sheldon]

Sheldon said: ↑
I've been baptised, I was 14, imaginary afterlife torture chambers are no more scary, just because I was too young to to know any better and fight back.

This kind of biblical rationale is hardly that surprising, a lot of it is based on fear and phycological bullying.

baptism of a child (such as an infant) doesn't make him fully Christian, a child becomes Christian with receival of holy spirit, which is in Catholic church gained with confirmation when you're 12 yo.
because biblically a 12 yo. is an adult. capable to decide for himself.

Which bit of "I was 14," has confused you?

It's another no true Scotsman fallacy, of course. Incidentally the baptism of newborn babies was because for centuries the church maintained babies that were unbaptised went to hell. As if the anguish of the parents was insufficient. Until the church realised they were losing out on yet anther scam of course, and introduced purgatory, where dead babies and loved ones could be held until the church received sufficient remuneration from their grieving parents and loved ones.

 

[Sheldon]

The Bible is authoritative just not on RF for some reason.

You believe it is authoritative, but that is an unevidenced subjective belief. However you are still missing the point, and failing to grasp that it is open to subjective interpretation, and all Christians claim they know bets what it means. If it were a reliable source of truth then it would not have produced 45000 different sects and denominations globally. This point can't be waved away with irrational arguments from assertion fallacies.

 

[Sheldon]

You know Bart Ehrman was born again and other atheists? You have objective evidence or are you taking their word for it?

Yes, Bart Ehrman became a born-again fundamentalist evangelical Christian at the age of 15. He is also a distinguished professor of religious studies at The University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill and is one of America's most widely read scholars of early Christianity and the New Testament.

CITATION

Now if Dr Ehrman said you were not really a Christian, I'd be forced to point out he was using a no true Scotsman fallacy, just as I have done to you, when you use these.

I could probably dig up my confirmation certificate if I still have it. There'd be photos after the service, church records etc etc...

 

[Sheldon]

Baptism is a voluntary ritual and identifying with Christ as Romans 6 describes, after a person has received Christ and is born again. I also was baptized at 13 but wasn’t saved until 28. I just went through confirmation but there wasn’t any change until I was saved and born again.

You bought into the mumbo jumbo, I did not, and am an atheist. People who were once Christians are now atheists, your subjective view is nothing more than a no true Scotsman fallacy.

 

[Sheldon]

I actually watched all of this

You are absolutely right, Sheldon. Atrocious behaviour.

Well I was lucky that where I live Christianity was a mild type of indoctrination, some people have had to endure far worse. Also atheism is no big deal here in the UK, the godless are rapidly reaching the majority.

 

[ElishaElijah]

Well I was lucky that where I live Christianity was a mild type of indoctrination, some people have had to endure far worse. Also atheism is no big deal here in the UK, the godless are rapidly reaching the majority.

So…that’s also what Jesus said:
““Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭7:13‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

And also not the point, the point is many people don’t know what the Bible says or teaches about what it means to be a Christian. They were taught a false concept and rail against that false teaching thinking they were a Christian but were not.