Atheists Pressure MI School District to Stop Treating the Birth of Jesus as Fact

[Subduction Zone]

Really? you might want to read through what you are quoting.

Wow! Even with a smiley. Whoosh!!

 

[Jose Fly]

I stand corrected in how I said it. The proper way is "The new application of...."

Because the application was " I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"

Thus it was government not establishing a religion, which has nothing to do with today's modern application. "And the free exercise thereof", which certainly isn't true today.

Note that Jefferson described "an eternal wall of separation", rather than "a wall with a one-way door in it". If you erect a wall between two things, that separates them both from each other. That's how walls work.

 

[Kenny]

Sorry, but I don't understand how that relates to what I asked. You claimed that the founding fathers intended for faith to influence government. I'm asking you, why then did they prohibit religious tests for public office?


Because for a very long time in this country, the majority of the population was Christian and non-Christians were effectively second-class citizens. So government promotion of Christianity was rarely challenged. It's only been since about the 1960's that that's changed.

I answered your question. Christianity is not you have to believe as I believe. You can be an atheist in a Christian country.

And, no. It took almost 200 years to change what the country was all about and it was 1960 that had enough judges that wanted to make law instead of letting Congress do it.

 

[Kenny]

Wow! Even with a smiley. Whoosh!!

I'm sorry, did I forget to recognize the smiley? One, friendly, coming right up!

 

[Kenny]

Note that Jefferson described "an eternal wall of separation", rather than "a wall with a one-way door in it". If you erect a wall between two things, that separates them both from each other. That's how walls work.

That doesn't fit his narrative that I quoted. Specifically "government" not "religious institutions" is referenced.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

OK... I wouldn't actually use the new term of separation of Church of State but rather "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" - which is, IMV, a big difference.

How is it different? Jefferson, by the way, one of the principle authors of the Constitution, does not agree with you at all.

 

[ecco]

[Laughs] Okay. When I was 16 years old I had this plan. I was going to take a bunch of Playboy pin ups down to the local baptist church and attach them to the radio antennas and windshield wipers of cars parked there. I lived in the Bible belt. I saw everything Christians around me said as pure nonsense. I didn't believe in God.

If you think I wasn't an atheist well I grant you permission to labor under that delusion. But what the hell do you know about it? Huh? Nothing.

With all due respect, your playboy prank sounds more like teenage rebellion against a specific branch of religion. Or maybe even against religion in general because all around you people were proselytizing and praying. That just means you didn't like it. It doesn't mean you really took stock of things and came to the realization that no gods existed.

I was an atheist by age ten. I would never have occurred to me to prank a church because churches and religions were meaningless to me.

There have been multiple polls on forums asking atheists what would it take to convince them that God was real. The answers are pretty much along the lines of "Nothing" to "An actual appearance of God".

Over the years people have tried to convince me of the errors of my ways. Here I am, still a happy atheist. That makes me wonder what could have convinced you, an atheist, to become a bible totin' anti evilutionist?

There are always exceptions. However, as I and others noted, they are very, very rare.


ETA: Just read your post #228. It sounds more like anger against religion and the religious than atheism. But, what do I know.

 

[ecco]

"The Israeli Antiquities Authority has failed to offer any report explaining why it concluded the ossuary is a forgery."

"The fragile condition of the ossuary attests to its antiquity. The Israel Geological Survey submitted the ossuary to a variety of scientific tests, which determined that the limestone of the ossuary had a patina or sheen consistent with being in a cave for many centuries. The same type of patina covers the incised lettering of the inscription as the rest of the surface. It is claimed that if the inscription were recent, this would not be the case."

Reference: Craig A. Evans, Jesus and the Ossuaries Baylor University Press, 2003

In 2008, an archaeometric analysis conducted by Amnon Rosenfeld, Howard Randall Feldman, and Wolfgang Elisabeth Krumbein strengthened the authenticity contention of the ossuary. It found that patina on the ossuary surface matched that in the engravings, and that microfossils in the inscription seemed naturally deposited.

Referernce: "Archaeometric Analysis of the James Ossuary". gsa.confex.com. Retrieved 2016-10-11.

"The Biblical Archaeology Review also continued to defend the ossuary. In articles in the February 2005 issues, several paleographic experts argue that the James Ossuary is authentic and should be examined by specialists outside of Israel."

Another article claims the cleaning of the James Ossuary before it was examined may have caused the problem with the patina. On June 13, 2012 a Biblical Archaeology Review press release announced the first major post-trial analysis of the ossuary, discussing the plausibility of its authenticity and using statistical analysis of ancient names to suggest that in contemporary Jerusalem, there would be 1.71 people named James with a father Joseph and a brother named Jesus

Reference: Biblical Archaeology Society | Press Release: "Brother of Jesus" Proved Ancient and Authentic Archived 2012-06-16 at the Wayback Machine.

There is no evidence that the ossuary's inscription was forged, according to Jerusalem Judge Aharon Farkash. On March 14th 2012, he stated ..."the prosecution failed to prove their accusations beyond a reasonable doubt."

Reference: "Breaking News: Golan and Deutsch Acquitted of All Forgery Charges". Bible History Daily. 14 March 2012.

He was particularly scathing about tests carried out by the Israel police forensics laboratory that he said had probably contaminated the ossuary, making it impossible to carry out further scientific tests on the inscription.

Reference: "Search". The Globe and Mail. Toronto. May 21, 2012.

Let's assume, for the sake of discussion, that the box and the inscription could be dated to 1950 years ago. What does that indicate?
It is the actual Ossuary of James brother of Jesus.
-or-
It is a box that a believer forged 1950 years ago.

 

[Salvador]

Let's assume, for the sake of discussion, that the box and the inscription could be dated to 1950 years ago. What does that indicate?
It is the actual Ossuary of James brother of Jesus.
-or-
It is a box that a believer forged 1950 years ago.

Good question....unfortunately, in this scenario..there'd be no way to know if the James Ossuary were authentic or fake.

 

[ecco]

There's additional compelling evidence for the existence of a historical Jesus Christ.

Since you're moving on, is it safe to assume that you agree that the Ossuary is proof of nothing?

"Mara bar ("son of ") Serapion, sometimes spelled Mara bar Sarapion was a Stoic philosopher from the Roman province of Syria. He is noted for a letter he wrote in Syriac to his son, who was also named Serapion. The letter was composed sometime after 73 AD but before the 3rd century, and most scholars date it to shortly after AD 73 during the first century. The letter may be an early non-Christian reference to the crucifixion of Jesus."

Reference: Van Voorst, Robert E (2000). Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence. Eerdmans Publishing. ISBN 0-8028-4368-9 pages 53-56

That's confusing at best.

• You state that someone named Serapion was a Stoic philosopher from the Roman province of Syria.
• You state he wrote a letter.
• You state the letter was written sometime after 73 AD but before the 3rd century.

That's a span of 250 years.

Here's the confusing part. How can you assert that Serapion was a Stoic philosopher from the Roman province of Syria when you don't have a clue about when he lived?

Also, your sole source for this is the writing of a theologian, Robert Van Voorst. Aside from being a theologian, what qualifies him to discuss this? Who discovered the letter? Where was it discovered? How and by whom was it dated?

 

[Subduction Zone]

With all due respect, your playboy prank sounds more like teenage rebellion against a specific branch of religion. Or maybe even against religion in general because all around you people were proselytizing and praying. That just means you didn't like it. It doesn't mean you really took stock of things and came to the realization that no gods existed.

I was an atheist by age ten. I would never have occurred to me to prank a church because churches and religions were meaningless to me.

There have been multiple polls on forums asking atheists what would it take to convince them that God was real. The answers are pretty much along the lines of "Nothing" to "An actual appearance of God".

Over the years people have tried to convince me of the errors of my ways. Here I am, still a happy atheist. That makes me wonder what could have convinced you, an atheist, to become a bible totin' anti evilutionist?

There are always exceptions. However, as I and others noted, they are very, very rare.


ETA: Just read your post #228. It sounds more like anger against religion and the religious than atheism. But, what do I know.

How often have you been accused of "hating God"? To me hating God is something that a believer would do. His actions were those of a believer and not those of an atheist.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Since you're moving on, is it safe to assume that you agree that the Ossuary is proof of nothing?




That's confusing at best.

• You state that someone named Serapion was a Stoic philosopher from the Roman province of Syria.
• You state he wrote a letter.
• You state the letter was written sometime after 73 AD but before the 3rd century.

That's a span of 250 years.

Here's the confusing part. How can you assert that Serapion was a Stoic philosopher from the Roman province of Syria when you don't have a clue about when he lived?

Also, your sole source for this is the writing of a theologian, Robert Van Voorst. Aside from being a theologian, what qualifies him to discuss this? Who discovered the letter? Where was it discovered? How and by whom was it dated?

Minor correction, the third century began with the year 201. That was a time span of rough!y 125 years. Starting points for centuries is often very confusing. Look how many began their celebration of the millennium on the evening of December 31, 1999.

 

[ecco]

Faith was always to have influence in government

Good Idea! Let faith influence government. Like in the good old days.

Like when a King changed his mind, became a Protestant, and went on a killing spree of Catholics.
Like when a Catholic killed the Protestant King and went on a killing spree of Protestants.
Like when the government tried and executed tens of thousands of witches accused by clerics.
Like when Protestants ran away from England because the official Protestant government was of a different protestant sect.
Like when Lutheran writings convinced the head of a government that Jews were evil and deserved to die.

Good Idea! Let faith influence government.

 

[ecco]

... This resulted in purging of any physical records.

Do you have any evidence for this assertion?

The faithful had to carry records in their minds through recollection. The stories changed as they were passed down in various directions.

Stories changed like...

Remember that old guy who was telling us to love one another, remember he brought some really good bread?​

-to-

And Jesus took the loaves; and when he had given thanks, he distributed to the disciples, and the disciples to them that were set down; and likewise of the fishes as much as they would. 12When they were filled, he said unto his disciples, Gather up the fragments that remain, that nothing be lost. 13Therefore they gathered them together, and filled twelve baskets with the fragments of the five barley loaves, which remained over and above unto them that had eaten. 14Then those men, when they had seen the miracle that Jesus did, said, This is of a truth that prophet that should come into the world.

​

Stories changed to the extent that all 2000+ words of the Sermon on the Mount were somehow quoted word for word.

It was not until 100 years or so after Jesus, did historians began to filter through the debris to find clues. There had been a genocide of Christians in an attempt to neutralize the movement. It destroyed most hard records.

Do you have any evidence for this assertion?

The atheists appear to be an extension of that genocide cult, still stuck in their first century glory days of book burning.

If memory serves, it was, and still is, religions that would ban and burn books.

Perhaps you've never heard of the Index librorum prohibitorum (English: List of Prohibited Books).
Perhaps you should look here...
These 10 Classic Novels Were Once Banned in the USA
...and tell me what atheist group supported these bans.

 

[Salvador]

Since you're moving on, is it safe to assume that you agree that the Ossuary is proof of nothing?

Since there's no way for us to know whether James Ossuary is authentic or an ancient forgery, this artifact can't be considered as reliable evidence for the historicity of Jesus Christ.


That's confusing at best.

• You state that someone named Serapion was a Stoic philosopher from the Roman province of Syria.
• You state he wrote a letter.
• You state the letter was written sometime after 73 AD but before the 3rd century.

That's a span of 250 years.

Here's the confusing part. How can you assert that Serapion was a Stoic philosopher from the Roman province of Syria when you don't have a clue about when he lived?

Also, your sole source for this is the writing of a theologian, Robert Van Voorst. Aside from being a theologian, what qualifies him to discuss this? Who discovered the letter? Where was it discovered? How and by whom was it dated?

Mara Bar-Serapion's letter is preserved in a 6th or 7th century manuscript (BL Add. 14658) held by the British Library.

Unfortunately, for whatever reason, the age of Mara Bar-Serapion's letter can't be measured by radiocarbon 14 dating; so then, there's no way to know with any level of certainty whether this letter was written in 73 AD or at a much later date.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Mara Bar-Serapion's letter is preserved in a 6th or 7th century manuscript (BL Add. 14658) held by the British Library.

Unfortunately, for whatever reason, the age of Mara Bar-Serapion's letter can't be measured by radiocarbon 14 dating; so then, there's no way to know with any level of certainty whether this letter was written in 73 AD or at a much later date.

The problem with that letter, even if it was written in the first century is that it is not written as an eyewitness but as someone reacting to a story about Jesus, and it is not even clear that the allusion was about Jesus.

 

[Jose Fly]

I answered your question. Christianity is not you have to believe as I believe. You can be an atheist in a Christian country.

And, no. It took almost 200 years to change what the country was all about and it was 1960 that had enough judges that wanted to make law instead of letting Congress do it.

Thanks for your input.

 

[Jose Fly]

That doesn't fit his narrative that I quoted. Specifically "government" not "religious institutions" is referenced.

Um.....what do you think the term "state" refers to?

 

[Salvador]

The problem with that letter, even if it was written in the first century is that it is not written as an eyewitness but as someone reacting to a story about Jesus, and it is not even clear that the allusion was about Jesus.

Ill now concede that neither the James Ossuary nor Mara-Bar Serapion's letter is highly conclusive extra-biblical evidence for the historicity of Jesus Christ, but the Romano-Jewish historian Flavius Josephus wrote about Jesus Christ as being a historical person. So then, there's evidence for a historical Jesus Christ.

The extant manuscripts of the writings of the first-century Romano-Jewish historian Flavius Josephus include references to Jesus and the origins of Christianity.

References:

Feldman & Hata 1987, pp. 54–57
Flavius Josephus & Maier 1995, pp. 284–285.


Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews, written around 93–94 AD, includes two references to the biblical Jesus Christ in Books 18 and 20 and a reference to John the Baptist in Book 18.

References:

Feldman & Hata 1987, pp. 54–57.
Flavius Josephus & Maier 1995, p. 12.

Scholarly opinion varies on the total or partial authenticity of the reference in Book 18, Chapter 3, 3 of the Antiquities, a passage that states that Jesus the Messiah was a wise teacher who was crucified by Pilate, usually called the Testimonium Flavianum

Scholarly opinion varies on the total or partial authenticity of the reference in Book 18, Chapter 3, 3 of the Antiquities, a passage that states that Jesus the Messiah was a wise teacher who was crucified by Pilate, usually called the Testimonium Flavianum.

References:

Feldman & Hata 1987, pp. 54–57.
Maier 2007, pp. 336–337
Schreckenberg & Schubert 1992a, pp. 38–41.

 

[Earthling]

With all due respect, your playboy prank sounds more like teenage rebellion against a specific branch of religion. Or maybe even against religion in general because all around you people were proselytizing and praying. That just means you didn't like it. It doesn't mean you really took stock of things and came to the realization that no gods existed.

I was an atheist by age ten. I would never have occurred to me to prank a church because churches and religions were meaningless to me.

There have been multiple polls on forums asking atheists what would it take to convince them that God was real. The answers are pretty much along the lines of "Nothing" to "An actual appearance of God".

Over the years people have tried to convince me of the errors of my ways. Here I am, still a happy atheist. That makes me wonder what could have convinced you, an atheist, to become a bible totin' anti evilutionist?

There are always exceptions. However, as I and others noted, they are very, very rare.


ETA: Just read your post #228. It sounds more like anger against religion and the religious than atheism. But, what do I know.

Yes. Exactly. You think you know everything. Like an atheist. Like I used to. I was wrong.