The Religion, Atheism and Science Discussion

Cpt Matt Sparrow · Post by **Cpt Matt Sparrow** » Fri Sep 26, 2008 4:07 pm

Hi Gary

This is the one I meant (just searched my facebook sent messages)

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=JnU3s8jTa ... re=related

The Zeitgeist movie is very entertaining but seems to be regarded skeptically by many people.
I think the point of the video (posted above) which I completely agree with, is just because something is controversial, it doesn't make it true.

To me it has the same type of sensational spin the De Vinci Code did.

The video link above is by a non Christian without a bias.

There are 4 non Christian historians that mention the historical Jesus.
I have no doubt of Jesus' life.

Do you doubt the historical Jesus too Gary or just the Jesus of the Bible?

Matt

highpriestess · Post by **highpriestess** » Fri Sep 26, 2008 4:09 pm

read rice's now and my post actually applies to both of their posts. how's that for confuckled. lol

Cpt Matt Sparrow · Post by **Cpt Matt Sparrow** » Fri Sep 26, 2008 4:10 pm

ps

completely agree with Gary's idea of spirituality as oposed to being in a religion and also Rob's point about human kindness.

Mind you I think even Satanism mentions taking your responsibilty in all maters. See there is good in most things!!

Matt

rice_pudding · Post by **rice_pudding** » Fri Sep 26, 2008 4:13 pm

i agree with gary's thoughts on spirituality too, its more or less how i live my life

Rob

highpriestess · Post by **highpriestess** » Fri Sep 26, 2008 4:13 pm

Hey, i dont doubt there was a man named Jesus and that he walked around teaching and preaching good things. But also... and don't flame me here for thinking multicontextually. lol.... but there have been many people over the years who have claimed to be the second coming of christ (manson, koresh, etc...) so, assuming the same types of chemical imbalances and delusional disorders existed in the bodys and brains of men back then as they do today, could it also be true that the guy was just some weirdo who thought he was the son of god and perhaps just the mentality and superstitions of the time period induced people to buy into it?

i mean, say what you want, but it IS possible.

rice_pudding · Post by **rice_pudding** » Fri Sep 26, 2008 4:18 pm

highpriestess wrote:Hey, i dont dount there was aman named Jesus and that he wlaked around teaching and preching good things.

neither do i, unless someone basicaly wrote the first fantasy novel, way back in the old days.

kinda puts shakespear in his place

Rob

highpriestess · Post by **highpriestess** » Fri Sep 26, 2008 4:27 pm

lol. i had to go back and correct many many typos. sometimes my brain works faster than my fingers. in my REAL life, everything i type goes to my administrative assistant for editing. lol. guess i am spoiled.

siro_angel · Post by **siro_angel** » Fri Sep 26, 2008 4:28 pm

lmao!

i wish i had an administrative assitant for editing!

Simon

Randy Magic · Post by **Randy Magic** » Fri Sep 26, 2008 4:55 pm

Matthew wrote: The Zeitgeist movie is very entertaining but seems to be regarded skeptically by many people.
I think the point of the video (posted above) which I completely agree with, is just because something is controversial, it doesn't make it true.

To me it has the same type of sensational spin the De Vinci Code did.

The video link above is by a non Christian without a bias.

There are 4 non Christian historians that mention the historical Jesus.
I have no doubt of Jesus' life.

Do you doubt the historical Jesus too Gary or just the Jesus of the Bible?

Matt

Hi Matt -

I think I outlined my beliefs quite clearly. As to your statements above, I would suggest that the Bible is "regarded skeptically by many people," and that the Bible is very "controversial," which, by your own estimation, makes it possibly untrue.

As far as the "sensational spin" that you claim - is it any less "sensational" than Gibson's "Passion of the Christ," or any of the Passion Plays produced by Hollywood, or other entertainment entity? I think Yes. Why? Because it is not a Hollywood film, and is more reflective of a documentary. For example, a ton of people hated Moore's "Sicko" film, but, there were no legitimate inaccuracies. So, I would challenge you to consider the possibility that just because you may not like the content, does not automatically make it incorrect, or untruthful. I think anything that goes against another person's belief system is going to be initially perceived as offensive, and/or threatening - and, it most certainly can be. However, at one point we were all very sure (scientists included) that the Earth was flat and at the center of the Universe - interesting how things can change with time and knowledge. A mind is like a parachute - works best when open.

The film addresses the 4 historians you mention, three of which only use the term Christus - which means "the annoited one," not Jesus. The fourth was found to be a forgery hundreds of years ago, but is still cited as truth. I think it is more interesting that of the 20-30 known unbiased historians that were alive at the time - NONE, refer to anyone named Jesus Christ, or his supposed miracles. Did he ever exist? I'd like to think so. Was he the son of God, only as far as he was personified as God's Sun. As HighPriestess alluded to above, what if this character "Jesus" was just a delusional man that had a cult following? Nobody truly knows for sure, which is why we call it "faith."

How do you explain the happenings at the Council of Nicaea? Seems to me like a group of powerful men decided which books would make up the "Bible," and which would not. How is that then God's book? Constantine I, who ruled Rome at the time, did not embrace Christianity until he was over 40y/o, and was not baptized until on his death bed, yet still maintained the title of Pontifex Maximus until the day he died (a head of pagan priesthood). Constantine I was also the first ruler to go to war with other Christians, breaking the 300 years of pacifism that all Christians shared. This is all in the historical record, and can be researched at will.

So, I do not just accept the Bible, or that Jesus somehow died for my sins. I think we are all responsible for ourselves, and to each other in this life. And, guess what? If there is an afterlife and Heaven does exist, I do not think God will send any "non-believer" that has lived a decent, honest life, to Hell. How is that a loving God? It's not.

George Carlin (RIP) sums it up nicely, IMHO: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeSSwKffj9o

No offense, of course.

Best,
Gary

Randy Magic · Post by **Randy Magic** » Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:18 pm

I thought I'd also share a few words from Noam Chomsky, a man I admire greatly:

On Religion: http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/1990----.htm

Or, Google Chomsky and Religion. Good stuff.

Best,
Gary

Cpt Matt Sparrow · Post by **Cpt Matt Sparrow** » Fri Sep 26, 2008 6:12 pm

Hi Gary

LOL These mesasge boards (grin)

Just for the theology thread record. Matt likes to throw spanners in the works, cause thinking and question things.

Hmm sorry we will have to agree to disagree on the film. Not very academic or well argued for me, but we all have different ways of seeing things. Different tastes, different views and definately multiple truths in life!

And explain those things...Gary I cannot!!

There is so much I do not know about everything. I am just fascinated and also enthused to talk with like minded good people like your self who also find it such a great subject

I am re reading a great book on the Dead Sea Scrolls and now want to re-read the historians work w both mentioned

Matt

highpriestess · Post by **highpriestess** » Fri Sep 26, 2008 8:44 pm

gah! how do you guys have so much time to read all that stuff?!?!? I barely have enough time in the day to read the instructions on the back of my microwave dinner in the evening!

siro_angel · Post by **siro_angel** » Fri Sep 26, 2008 8:45 pm

lol

I know the feeling

Simon

McLowery · Post by **McLowery** » Fri Sep 26, 2008 9:40 pm

As I stand here before all of you, in my nakedness (don't mind the birthday suit, I'm strictly speaking of my psyche. The birthday suit is just the by-product of liking to walk around in the nude

) I bear witness to the best piece of information gained from this thread so far, it is a word I never heard before, HighPriestess said it: CONFUCKLED. Everything else here we know it one way or the other, as for me, this is the first time I've heard confuckled, confuckled... lol confuckled.... I like to say a new word a bunch of times.. confuckled.. that way.. confuckled I can learn... confuckled to adapt it into... confuckled my vocabulary.. confuckled. I think I have... confuckled it now.

Randy Magic · Post by **Randy Magic** » Fri Sep 26, 2008 9:48 pm

Matthew wrote:we will have to agree to disagree on the film. Not very academic or well argued for me, but we all have different ways of seeing things.

Indeed. The Bible is certainly not "very academic or well argued" for me either - quite the opposite, especially considering New vs. Old Testaments.

You are correct in that we all see things through our own spectacles. However, I have found in life that our personal spectacles can be easily fogged up by outside steam that we have no control over. So, sometimes, I remove my spectacles, wipe them clear, and then take another look and try again to understand and/or see things more clearly. Of course, I was not able to routinely do this until my 20's, as I was Catholic until I reached the Age of Reason. lol

Question for you Matt: Why are certain things in the Bible embraced, while other things are ignored? A curious question, considering the elevated place in greater society that the Bible holds. Curious indeed.

Politics? Maybe...

Best,
Gary