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

[IndigoChild5559]

Again, we have three, separate eye-witness accounts of people who claim to have met him.


Actually, none of those are eye-witness accounts. The absolute earliest any of the new testament dates back to is several decades after Jesus' supposed death. Not a single actual eye-witness account exists.

Matthew, Peter, James, and John, are all eyewitnesses.

Socrates himself, like Jesus, left no writings of his own. Plato and Xenophan wrote about Socrates, and he is mentioned by other philosophers though I'm not sure they knew him. But from what I've read, it appears that Plato put a lot of words in Socrates' mouth. Thus I am of the opinion that a man named Socrates existed, but we really don't know much about him. The man we think we know is largely a construction of Plato's. Go ahead and do the research and you will find what I'm saying is talked about all over the place.

FWIW, I think the eyewitness accounts of Jesus are embellished as well.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Get a lot of use from that tongue do you? As an aside, do you know the originators of "Google? I do. Let us just say your tongue (in cheek) out of mouth emote has not a clue!

Lastly, maybe you missed the request. Let me rephrase, as I knew SPLC when they were on the right side, PROVE it!

Well, since you have zero credibility? Your unproven claim only adds fuel to my statement that they are just another hate group.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Matthew, Peter, James, and John, are all eyewitnesses..

No, they are no such thing. We don't have their original words, either. Just heresay, generations later of what they allegedly said.

Socrates himself, like Jesus, left no writings of his own. Plato and Xenophan wrote about Socrates, and he is mentioned by other philosophers though I'm not sure they knew him. But from what I've read, it appears that Plato put a lot of words in Socrates' mouth. Thus I am of the opinion that a man named Socrates existed, but we really don't know much about him. The man we think we know is largely a construction of Plato's. Go ahead and do the research and you will find what I'm saying is talked about all over the place..

Fair enough. But. Nobody is trying to get hate-laws passed, based on what Socrates allegedly said. The same cannot be said for the Jesus myth.

FWIW, I think the eyewitness accounts of Jesus are embellished as well.

Except that they are not, and you don't have any actual eyewitness accounts-- only "friend of a friend" tales, at least one generation removed.

You know-- the same as Bigfoot. Or Santa Claus.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

No, they are no such thing. We don't have their original words, either. Just heresay, generations later of what they allegedly said.

Not generations later. The gospel of John was the last to be written, and it was written from the POV of the city of Jerusalem still standing, which would mean that the Apostle John was still alive though old (the only disciple not to be martyred according to oral tradition).

I agree that the original words are somewhat edited. In fact, we already know what some of the editing was, as we discovered early manuscripts that didn't have certain parts, such as the end of Mark or the story of the woman caught in adultery.

Fair enough. But. Nobody is trying to get hate-laws passed, based on what Socrates allegedly said. The same cannot be said for the Jesus myth.

Perhaps not due to Socrates, but there are plenty of anti-Religious sorts that are trying to pass hate-laws, both here in the US, and truly repressive regimes such as the Islamic world, and nightmare regimes such as China, which is trying to stamp out all religion.

You know-- the same as Bigfoot. Or Santa Claus.

Although Santa Claus is highly, highly evolved, I'm sure you realized he is based on the historical person of St. Nicholaus.

I am an agnostic when it comes to Bigfoot. There is an adage the "True life is stranger than fiction."

 

[lukethethird]

FWIW, I think the eyewitness accounts of Jesus are embellished as well.

There are no known eyewitness accounts of Jesus.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

There are no known eyewitness accounts of Jesus.

If that's what you think, there is no common ground for discussion.

 

[ecco]

Jesus, on the other hand, has good solid testimony of eye witness testimony of quite a few others who knew him. To start with, we have the three gospel writers, Matthew, John, and Mark writing for Peter.

Are you asserting that these "people" were eyewitnesses?

 

[ecco]

Though he's not so quick to assault Islam as he is the faith of Christ.

Maybe that's because he wasn't indoctrinated by Muslims.

 

[TheresOnlyNow]

Maybe that's because he wasn't indoctrinated by Muslims.

Maybe he's scared to anger a people that kill their enemies and explode themselves to make their point.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Not generations later. The gospel of John was the last to be written, and it was written from the POV of the city of Jerusalem still standing, which would mean that the Apostle John was still alive though old (the only disciple not to be martyred according to oral tradition)..

Nope. That isn't supported by modern biblical scholarship. "John" was some anonymous person writing in the style of John (allegedly), no less than 60 years later. That's 3 generations...

I agree that the original words are somewhat edited. In fact, we already know what some of the editing was, as we discovered early manuscripts that didn't have certain parts, such as the end of Mark or the story of the woman caught in adultery..

Citation?

Perhaps not due to Socrates, but there are plenty of anti-Religious sorts that are trying to pass hate-laws, both here in the US, and truly repressive regimes such as the Islamic world, and nightmare regimes such as China, which is trying to stamp out all religion..

Really? Can you name ... one? No?

Notebook: Islam isn't anti-religion, is it? What with it being ... religion.

As for China? It's deeply religious-- just not in the Western Style. (ancestor worship, etc)

Although Santa Claus is highly, highly evolved, I'm sure you realized he is based on the historical person of St. Nicholaus..

Metaphors are not your strongest suit... right?

I am an agnostic when it comes to Bigfoot. There is an adage the "True life is stranger than fiction."

Again... *sigh*

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Are you asserting that these "people" were eyewitnesses?

Matthew, Peter, James, and John were eyewitnesses, yes. Were their writings later embellished, yes.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Nope. That isn't supported by modern biblical scholarship. "John" was some anonymous person writing in the style of John (allegedly), no less than 60 years later. That's 3 generations...


Citation?



Really? Can you name ... one? No?

Notebook: Islam isn't anti-religion, is it? What with it being ... religion.

As for China? It's deeply religious-- just not in the Western Style. (ancestor worship, etc)


Metaphors are not your strongest suit... right?


Again... *sigh*

OMGosh. You are not even living in this century. I don't feel like doing tons of research to teach you what should be common knowledge, such as the severe persecution by China of all religions that is going on right now. Do your own basic research. When you have the basics down, then come back and we can have a lovely discussion on the nuances.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Matthew, Peter, James, and John were eyewitnesses, yes. Were their writings later embellished, yes.

No. That is simply not supported by modern biblical scholarship. None of those four wrote anything, as far as we know-- we have nothing from them.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

OMGosh. You are not even living in this century. I don't feel like doing tons of research to teach you what should be common knowledge, such as the severe persecution by China of all religions that is going on right now. Do your own basic research. When you have the basics down, then come back and we can have a lovely discussion on the nuances.

LOL! China is very religious from my persepective: they still have ancestor worship (religion).

Just because they persecute Fundie Christians? Doesn't mean the persecute **all** religions.

And I kinda sympathize with their stance on fundamentalism... we have to fight their collective bigotry here in the USA, even today.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

No. That is simply not supported by modern biblical scholarship. None of those four wrote anything, as far as we know-- we have nothing from them.

You are stuck back in the 1800's. Scholarship has proceeded considerably since then. I will be the first to say that the scholars do not agree, which is why we cannot appeal to authority. However, it is worth mentioning that a great many of them teach it exactly as I have said it.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

LOL! China is very religious from my persepective: they still have ancestor worship (religion).

Just because they persecute Fundie Christians? Doesn't mean the persecute **all** religions.

And I kinda sympathize with their stance on fundamentalism... we have to fight their collective bigotry here in the USA, even today.

1. Do Christians not matter to you? Do you not believe in freedom of religion for all?

2. Christianity is far from the only religion they persecute. For example:

• Islam Escape from Xinjiang: Muslim Uighurs speak of China persecution
• Tibetan Buddhism https://www.fidh.org/IMG/pdf/en-report-tibet-4.pdf
• Falun Gong China: Repression Against Falungong Unabated
• Judaism Chinese Jews of Ancient Lineage Huddle Under Pressure

Those few religions that China consents to, it only allows because the sects allow heavy government control. For example, the Pope allows China to appoint his bishops--an obvious way for China to get bishops sympathetic to their ideology. One might argue that this state control is itself a form of repression.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

You are stuck back in the 1800's. Scholarship has proceeded considerably since then. I will be the first to say that the scholars do not agree, which is why we cannot appeal to authority. However, it is worth mentioning that a great many of them teach it exactly as I have said it.

LOL! It is you who is stuck back when the "best" scholarship still believed that the 4 gospels were written by the apostles named in their titles.

This is now been shown to be absolutely false, as the writings (from language analysts among other methods) all date from a minimum of 60 years too late to be "eyewitness".

Most date even later-- 90, 120 years and worse.

So if people are teaching as you say? They are being highly disingenuous, considering what we know now.

But that's the way of the indoctrinated: never let actual facts get in the way of what you desperately need to be "true".

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

1. Do Christians not matter to you? Do you not believe in freedom of religion for all?.

I think people matter. But fundamental, zealot christians? Dig the giant massive hole for themselves, because they are too often bigoted, judgmental and horrible to non-chrisitans.

I know-- I'm a victim of their systematic abuse myself.

Just because I sympathize with something, does not mean I condone it.

Nice Strawman you have there.

2. Christianity is far from the only religion they persecute. For example:

• Islam Escape from Xinjiang: Muslim Uighurs speak of China persecution
• Tibetan Buddhism https://www.fidh.org/IMG/pdf/en-report-tibet-4.pdf
• Falun Gong China: Repression Against Falungong Unabated
• Judaism Chinese Jews of Ancient Lineage Huddle Under Pressure

Those few religions that China consents to, it only allows because the sects allow heavy government control. For example, the Pope allows China to appoint his bishops--an obvious way for China to get bishops sympathetic to their ideology. One might argue that this state control is itself a form of repression.

Zealots from islam? Just as bad as zealots from chrisitanity. Same evil behavior.

Same for other religions you list, with the possible exception of Jews. The only place I see where zealots in that religion abuse others? Seems to be in Palestine, but they are such a small minority, that it doesn't affect the US where I live. Not even a little bit as much as fundamentalist christians do.

Would you like an example of some of the rampant evil, that fundie chrisitanity has wrought in the USA?

The US Constitution *should* have granted women, gays and other minorities equal rights with men, from Day One. That's how it's written.

But due to christianity? That's not how it's interpreted. It took us a hundred years to push back against this religion and it's ugly influence, and the fight goes on even today.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Matthew, Peter, James, and John, are all eyewitnesses.

But we have absolutely none of their writings whatsoever. We have no direct account from any of them. Jesus supposedly died around 30-36 AD. The book of Matthew was written some time between 75 and 100 AD. The gospel of Peter was most likely written around 100AD. The gospel of James was written some time in the 2nd century. The gospel of John was definitely not written until after 70 AD.

Once again, not a single eyewitness account of Jesus' life exists.

Socrates himself, like Jesus, left no writings of his own. Plato and Xenophan wrote about Socrates, and he is mentioned by other philosophers though I'm not sure they knew him. But from what I've read, it appears that Plato put a lot of words in Socrates' mouth. Thus I am of the opinion that a man named Socrates existed, but we really don't know much about him. The man we think we know is largely a construction of Plato's. Go ahead and do the research and you will find what I'm saying is talked about all over the place.

Doesn't change the fact that we have better reasons to believe Socrates existed than we do Jesus.

 

[ecco]

ecco said: ↑​

Are you asserting that these "people" were eyewitnesses?

Matthew, Peter, James, and John were eyewitnesses, yes. Were their writings later embellished, yes.

So what do you know that the vast majority of Biblical scholars don't know?

Please provide evidence to support your claim that "Matthew, Peter, James, and John were eyewitnesses".