Who are happier -- Christians or Atheists?

February 9th, 2015 at 2:54:57 PM permalink
Evenbob
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 146
Posts: 25011
Quote: FrGamble

The Gospels attributed to Mt., Mk., Lk., and John deserved those titles because they reflected Apostolic authority and were written by disciples connected to these early Church leaders.


You don't know that and can't prove it.

"All four Gospels were written anonymously and, based on the writings of the early church fathers, for close to two centuries after they were written, Christians had no idea who wrote them. Only in this later period did Christian scholars start guessing as to who the authors might have been. As the guesses were repeated and adopted by other Christian writers and thinkers, the guesses became traditions, and traditions became dogma.
Furthermore, none of the Gospel authors claims to have been a member of the apostolic group around Jesus or to have actually known any of the original Twelve Apostles. Modern scholarship, based on linguistic and textual analysis, and accompanied by the discovery of many ancient copies of Gospel manuscripts, shows that all four Gospels were written in Greek, outside of Roman Israel, at least thirty to sixty years after the death of Jesus."

The reason the Church won't accept the 'other'
Gospels is because they differ from what the
Church wants to say. It's not because they're
wrong.

This is the Church's take on it now that it's
been proven the Gospels are anonymous.

"Whether the actual saint wrote word-for word, whether a student did some later editing, or whether a student actually wrote what had been taught by the saint, we must remember the texts — whole and entire — are inspired by the Holy Spirit."

LOL! Like I didn't see that coming, playing the HS
card. Can't prove something? It can't be wrong, it
was overseen by the HS. How do we know this? It
says so in the Bible and the Bible says everything
in the Bible is true.
If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose.
February 9th, 2015 at 5:25:57 PM permalink
FrGamble
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 67
Posts: 7596
Quote: Evenbob

The reason the Church won't accept the 'other'
Gospels is because they differ from what the
Church wants to say. It's not because they're
wrong.


No, they differ from the truth about the person of Jesus Christ. This was not some big conspiracy taking place. This was at the beginning of the Church's history and based on the consistent preaching of the Apostles handed down through the years the four Gospels arose. The other gospels were wrong in the same way that if someone wrote a book about you and made you into a really nice open minded guy who saw both sides of every argument would be wrong ;)

I'm sorry about that, you are a great guy, stubborn though. Anyway, the people who knew Jesus and believed in Him because of the preaching of the Apostles and their disciples are the ones who recognized that these other 'gospels' were not true and inspired the same way the canonical Gospels are.

Quote:
This is the Church's take on it now that it's
been proven the Gospels are anonymous.

"Whether the actual saint wrote word-for word, whether a student did some later editing, or whether a student actually wrote what had been taught by the saint, we must remember the texts — whole and entire — are inspired by the Holy Spirit."

LOL! Like I didn't see that coming, playing the HS
card. Can't prove something? It can't be wrong, it
was overseen by the HS.


I fail to see how if we don't know the name of the actual person who wrote the Gospel of Matthew that it makes it wrong. Some people doubt Shakespeare wrote some of his famous plays, does that make them any less brilliant?
“It is with the smallest brushes that the artist paints the most exquisitely beautiful pictures.” (
February 9th, 2015 at 5:56:26 PM permalink
Evenbob
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 146
Posts: 25011
Quote: FrGamble
I fail to see how if we don't know the name of the actual person who wrote the Gospel of Matthew that it makes it wrong.


It doesn't make it 'wrong', it just doesn't
make it more right than the other Gospels
that didn't make the cut. The people who
put the NT together were hardly scholars
by any definition we hold today.

"No book initially was thought to have any more authority than any other. However, certain books were later labeled authoritative because their teachings supported the views of those in power. By selecting those books, church leaders were able to suppress views they didn’t like. If a different group had been in power, different books would have been chosen."

It's really that simple. Of course it's morphed
into a much more complicated and long winded
explanation. The truth is, there were already way
too many branches of Christianity and the Church
put an end to that. They kept it under control for
a thousand years, and then it got out of control
again.
If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose.
February 10th, 2015 at 2:35:53 PM permalink
Evenbob
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 146
Posts: 25011
Nareed made a good point earlier. All myths
were thought to be true when they were in
vogue. They weren't called myths, they were
belief systems and religions. It's only when they
fell out of favor and disappeared into antiquity
that they were considered myths.

We're on the coming down side of what will
someday be called the Jesus Myth. It's heyday
is long gone, even though there are a lot of
Christians in the world. The vast majority of
them are in name only, they have no fire in
their belly for it. In another 300 years Christianity
will be just another quaint relic of the past,
like Mithraism, Ashurism, or Tengriism, which is
5500 years old and still practiced today in some
places. Everything runs its course eventually..
If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose.
February 21st, 2015 at 6:33:14 PM permalink
FrGamble
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 67
Posts: 7596
Do you any difference between the ancient myths, which were written as myths, and the historical writings and evidence behind Jesus Christ and His life, death, an resurrection?
“It is with the smallest brushes that the artist paints the most exquisitely beautiful pictures.” (
February 21st, 2015 at 7:35:30 PM permalink
Dalex64
Member since: Mar 8, 2014
Threads: 3
Posts: 3687
I don't think anyone here has a problem with the historical writings and evidence behind Jesus Christ, his life, and his death, though there certainly are large gaps in the accounting of it.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." Daniel Patrick Moynihan
February 21st, 2015 at 7:40:11 PM permalink
Evenbob
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 146
Posts: 25011
Quote: FrGamble
Do you any difference between the ancient myths, which were written as myths, and the historical writings and evidence behind Jesus Christ and His life, death, an resurrection?


Myths were NOT written as myths, they were
at one time believed, then became myths.

Take a few modern examples. The average
person believe hats protect you in the winter
because 40%-50% of your body heat escapes
thru your head. This is a myth, it's actually
a miniscule 10%. Ask any adult as a trivia
question who said "I can see Russia from
my house?" and 90% will say Sarah Palin.
This is a modern myth, it was said by Tina
Fey on SNL.

The Jesus myth is no different. They started
rumors that grew into legends that became
the myth we know today.
If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose.
February 22nd, 2015 at 6:04:05 AM permalink
FrGamble
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 67
Posts: 7596
Myths are stories that present truths. I'm not sure we could use your examples as myth, but if we could then the myth that hats protect you from losing heat in the winter is true. It might not be 40-50% of your heat, but it is surely true that hats help keep you warm in the winter. The myth that Sarah Palin seemed to imply the closeness of Russia to Alaska would help her in foreign diplomacy communicates a truth.

I think you can see from these examples that many myths communicate truths, important truths, such as wearing a hat in wintertime. They start not in rumors, but in truth.

“It is with the smallest brushes that the artist paints the most exquisitely beautiful pictures.” (
February 22nd, 2015 at 12:15:14 PM permalink
Evenbob
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 146
Posts: 25011
Quote: FrGamble
They start not in rumors, but in truth.


Jesus died on the cross, that's true. Some
of his followers, hysterical with grief, had
a 'vision' that he appeared to them. That
might be true. From that the tales grew,
as did all kinds of tales in societies that
had nothing but oral traditions. Decades
later the tales were written down, and we
just believe every word like it's unimpeachable
truth.

I don't think so. I'll believe it when it's been
proven to be true, and it can't be, so it's
just another unproven myth.
If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose.
February 22nd, 2015 at 10:22:38 PM permalink
FrGamble
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 67
Posts: 7596
I don't see why it is so hard for you to see that what you describe could not possibly be the origins of Christianity. A grief laden vision of a follower of Jesus could not have spawned a religion that in the face of such fierce opposition would be spread to ever corner of the world. You don't seem to be grasping how powerful and true this seminal moment of the Resurrection must have been. A hysterical person's vision are not the tales that are passed down orally or in written form. They are also not the type of stories for which people will give up everything and die for. The Resurrection is true and the evidence is Christianity today and the living Lord Jesus who offers as proof for you an invitation to enter into a relationship.
“It is with the smallest brushes that the artist paints the most exquisitely beautiful pictures.” (