{"id":22229,"date":"2024-06-26T07:10:19","date_gmt":"2024-06-26T11:10:19","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.kyroot.com\/?page_id=22229"},"modified":"2024-08-15T01:59:23","modified_gmt":"2024-08-15T05:59:23","slug":"4851-4900","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.kyroot.com\/?page_id=22229","title":{"rendered":"4851-4900"},"content":{"rendered":"

(4851) Massaging Numbers 31<\/strong><\/p>\n

Most Christians profess a belief that the Bible relates actual history, with some admitting that the Garden of Eden and the Flood are probably mythical. But once you get past Genesis, into Exodus and beyond, they will usually claim that the Bible is factual. This runs into trouble in the Book of Numbers, most notably so in Chapter 31 where God orders a massacre of the Midianite people. In the following, a Christian attempts to address this issue in a way that protects his faith in a good god. But anyone on the outside can sense the failure of his effort.<\/p>\n

https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/AcademicBiblical\/comments\/1do5ne0\/does_numbers_3140_imply_that_god_demanded_the\/<\/a><\/p>\n

Chapter 31 contains a truly difficult, really horrific scene concerning violence against the Midianites. What happens is that God commands Moses to execute God\u2019s vengeance on them for an earlier incident where the Israelites were induced by the Midianites to worship idols (that happens in Chapter 25). So God sends them to go wreak vengeance on them, which means you gotta kill a lot of people. So Moses, he instructs\u2014apparently by God\u2019s blessing, because nowhere do we read any of this that God disapproves of what Moses said, and Moses is God\u2019s mouthpiece, there\u2019s nothing here about, you know, doing the wrong thing or whatever. But you have Moses tells the people to kill the men, women and children\u2014to wipe them out completely, though with the following exception: don\u2019t kill the virgins girls. The women who aren\u2019t virgins, they were the ones who led the Hebrew men astray to worship other idols.<\/p>\n

So kill everyone, just not the virgin girls or young women. They are to be \u201ckept alive for yourselves.\u201d That\u2019s the part, right? Think about what that might mean. After the battle, what happens is the Israelites divide the plunder, the livestock and the people, namely the young virgin woman\/girls, and this has caused no little amount of consternation among Bible readers. But let me collapse here, as a way of explaining this, not explaining it away, just dealing with the realities of the Bible. Let me collapse here two of the points I make in a book I wrote several years ago, The Bible Tells Me So, about divine violence. And they\u2019re related points.<\/p>\n

1)These are ideological, geopolitical stories, not depictions of actual events. I don\u2019t think the God of the infinite cosmos tells men to keep virgin girls for themselves.<\/p>\n

2) Secondly, related to the first, we are reading here how an ancient tribal Iron Age people, the Israelites, how they understood God in their context and their world. God is like a warrior, right? So we\u2019re hearing what their understanding of God in their context, I don\u2019t think we\u2019re getting a take on, \u201cthis is what God is like forever and always.\u201d Now I know talking this way can upset or maybe worry some people who are concerned about the Bible\u2019s authority and that means being historically accurate, and if it says God said this or did this, then it means God did it, and fine\u2014I get that. But I wanna turn the tables a little bit. It always surprises me how overly concerned some are to protect biblical inerrancy, but to do that at the expense of God\u2019s character. I\u2019m not gonna get into that whole issue here, that\u2019s a big discussion hermeneutically and theologically. But think about what we\u2019re doing there when we sort of protect these sections of the Bible rather than critique them.<\/p>\n

Numbers 31 presents a challenge to Christians who revere the Bible as a factual history while also believing that God is worthy of worship. One or the other has to give- that is, unless one is willing to perform wildly-contorted mental gymnastics to fool themselves. The rest of us will see it for what it is- the massacre did not happen and God is not <\/a>real.<\/p>\n

(4852) Yahweh takes over as other goes die out<\/strong><\/p>\n

Yahweh started out as a regional god of the Jews, but because other gods were under-performing, they lost their immortality and eventually died out, leaving Yahweh as the only remaining god, or so it seems when reading through the Bible. The following was taken from:<\/p>\n

https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/AcademicBiblical\/comments\/1dobdk7\/would_early_jewishchristians_have_easily_accepted\/<\/a><\/p>\n

At the time of the early Christians Yahweh would’ve likely already have been viewed as god of the whole world. Daniel McClellan in his article\u00a0The Gods-Complaint: Psalm 82 as a Psalm of Complaint<\/em>\u00a0argues that this shift likely happened around the time of the Babylonian exile. As you noted, Yahweh was once seen as a regional deity that was only the god of the Israelites (hence why Naaman took Israelite soil with him to worship Yahweh). This would pose an issue for Jews in captivity as they wondered \u201cHow could we sing the Lord\u2019s song in a foreign land?\u201d (Ps. 137:4). McClellan argues that to amend this issue Psalm 82 is voiced as a Psalm of complaint in the mouth of Yahweh accusing the other gods of not doing their jobs. Because of this they are stripped of their immortality and Yahweh is made god over the whole earth inheriting all nations. As McClellan puts it, it \u201cis a gods-complaint that facilitated the most important turning point in the history of the conceptualization of the God of Israel (851).\u201d<\/p>\n

This would make way for the later \u201cproto-monotheism\u201d we find within the book of Deutero-Isaiah where Yahweh is seen as using the Persian king Cyrus for his own purposes and claiming that there is \u201cno other god but him\u201d and that he causes both \u201cgood and calamity,\u201d etc. By the time we get to Jesus this is still the view of Yahweh that they carry and as far as I’m aware there are no post-exilic texts that make reference to Yahweh having limited sovereignty anymore.<\/p>\n

This is the easiest apologetic explanation for why the Old Testament testifies to other gods, while the New Testament and current-day Jews and Christians claim that Yahweh is the only god in existence. An outsider, though, can see the scam, and summarily dismiss this <\/a>foolishness.<\/p>\n

(4853) Ten Commandments and U.S. law<\/strong><\/p>\n

An effort by fundamentalist Christians to insert the Bible and Christianity into United States institutions has recently included an push to require the posting of the 10 Commandments in public school classrooms. The following discusses why this movement is fallacious:<\/p>\n

https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1dpy1pe\/the_10_commandments_are_not_in_keeping_with\/<\/a><\/p>\n

<\/a>The 10 Commandments are not in Keeping with American Laws or Values<\/p>\n

\n

There is a popular belief that the US is somehow based on the 10 Commandments. This is wrong, in no way does the US legal code resemble the 10 Commandments. To demonstrate this, I\u2019m going to go through the 10 Commandments and compare it to US laws and values. For the record, I consider the US values to be freedom, individuality, the value of hard work, of pulling yourself up by your bootstraps. As a side note, different religions actually break up the 10 Commandments differently. They all use the same section of Exodus, so they aren\u2019t substantially different, they just change what counts as the 1st Commandment and what counts as the 2nd. I\u2019m going to do the ones I grew up with. Again, it\u2019s all the same bit of the Bible, this is just how I am used to breaking them up. Also the translation is provided by Chabad.org, and the verses are Exodus 20:2-14.<\/p>\n

Commandment 1<\/strong>: I am the Lord, your God, Who took you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall not have the gods of others in My presence.<\/p>\n

This is directly contradicted by the 1st Amendment, which explicitly forbids the state promoting only one God. A private individual is more than happy to believe it, but the US government (in theory) can\u2019t promote it. Also God didn\u2019t take the overwhelming majority of Americans out of the land of Egypt, because only 2% of the US are Jewish (well, he didn\u2019t take anyone out of Egypt because the Exodus never happened, but that\u2019s for another post).<\/p>\n

Commandment 2<\/strong>: You shall not make for yourself a graven image or any likeness which is in the heavens above, which is on the earth below, or which is in the water beneath the earth. You shall neither prostrate yourself before them nor worship them, for I, the Lord, your God, am a zealous God, Who visits the iniquity of the fathers upon the sons, upon the third and the fourth generation of those who hate Me, and [I] perform loving kindness to thousands [of generations], to those who love Me and to those who keep My commandments.<\/p>\n

Again, contradicted by the 1st Amendment. The worship of graven images is perfectly legal in the US. Beyond that, the whole point of America (well, as it sometimes sells itself) is to be a place where people of different faiths all come together and work together for a common good. Discriminating against people who worship graven images is unamerican.<\/p>\n

Commandment 3<\/strong>: You shall not take the name of the Lord, your God, in vain, for the Lord will not hold blameless anyone who takes His name in vain.<\/p>\n

And for the hattrick, this is also contradicted by the 1st Amendment. I can go into the street and say God\u2019s name over and over again at nothing and for no reason and no one is going to arrest me.<\/p>\n

Commandment 4<\/strong>: Remember the Sabbath day to sanctify it. Six days may you work and perform all your labor, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord, your God; you shall perform no labor, neither you, your son, your daughter, your manservant, your maidservant, your beast, nor your stranger who is in your cities. or [in] six days the Lord made the heaven and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and He rested on the seventh day. Therefore, the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and sanctified it.<\/p>\n

There are no federal laws preventing people from working on Saturday (or Sunday). Nor are there any laws forcing me to sanctify Saturday in any particular way. I can go pick up sticks on the weekend and not be murdered by the state (Exodus 31:15 specifically calls out death as the punishment for breaking the Sabbath) as the Bible would suggest should happen to me. In fact, depending on who you are, resting over the weekend is unamerican. There are those who would suggest a true American would constantly be working and trying to outdo their competition and pull themselves up by their bootstraps. Not that I agree with that value, but some Americans think like that.<\/p>\n

Commandment 5<\/strong>: Honor your father and your mother, in order that your days be lengthened on the land that the Lord, your God, is giving you.<\/p>\n

I can be as rude to my parents as I want without the government stepping in. In some sense this also is against the 1st Amendment, I can say whatever I want (within reason) to anyone I want whenever I want, including to my parents.<\/p>\n

Commandment 6<\/strong>: You shall not murder.<\/p>\n

Well, the Bible gets one. Murder is certainly illegal in the United States of America. It\u2019s also illegal in every country, including ones that have nothing to do with the 10 Commandments, but hey they overlap here.<\/p>\n

Commandment 7<\/strong>: You shall not commit adultery.<\/p>\n

Very much not illegal in the US on the Federal level. It\u2019s certainly immoral, but not illegal. Some states do make it illegal (which I think is terrible, but that\u2019s beside the point ), but as a nation, it is not.<\/p>\n

Commandment 8<\/strong>: You shall not steal.<\/p>\n

Certainly Illegal in the US, and also everywhere else, but still Illegal in the US.<\/p>\n

Commandment 9<\/strong>: You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.<\/p>\n

So it sort of depends on what this commandment means, if it means you cannot give false testimony in court, yea that\u2019s illegal in the US. But the wording isn\u2019t so clear. It might literally just mean \u201cdon\u2019t lie about what your neighbor is up to.\u201d In which case you are more than welcome to do that in the US, assuming you don\u2019t defame them.<\/p>\n

Commandment 10<\/strong>: You shall not covet your neighbor’s house. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, his manservant, his maidservant, his ox, his donkey, or whatever belongs to your neighbor.<\/p>\n

This is not only not illegal, jealousy is actively encouraged by the US, it\u2019s part of the fundamental way our economic system functions. US Companies are always trying to get us to be jealous of other people\u2019s stuff in order to get us to buy stuff. Say what you will about how moral (or not) that is, but it is certainly very American.<\/p>\n

So, let\u2019s tally things up shall we: We have 4 commandments that actively contradict American values (1, 2, 3, 10). 2 commandments that just aren\u2019t illegal (4, 5), one that is selectively illegal (7), one that might be in keeping with the US legal system depending on how you read it (9), and two that are illegal everywhere, including the US (6, 8). If we are as generous as possible, 4\/10 are in keeping with the US. That\u2019s less than half, and we have to be generous to get it up to 40%, that\u2019s the same percent of them that directly contradict American Values. Even then, the commandments that are illegal in the US are also considered illegal or immoral basically everywhere. The US is not unique for punishing lying under oath or punishing murder. Every country makes murder illegal, using that as evidence that the 10 Commandments are American is just as effective as arguing that it makes them Indian. The 10 Commandments are in no way American, despite what some people think.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Christians extol the Ten Commandments without even considering how they could be improved, and improved immensely. Posting them in public schools reveals the desperation they sense when their way of belief is fading <\/a>fast.<\/p>\n

(4854) Uncle Jeff<\/strong><\/p>\n

The concept that people will be able to transfer their lives from earth to heaven, and be recognizable in the familiar forms that we are used to seeing them is a fallacy. First of all, your grandson and grandfather would be the same age? How would that play out? But even more unsettling it that the rough edges of each person\u2019s personality would necessarily be transformed in heaven, leaving the person that you knew on earth unrecognizable. The following bio of \u2018Uncle Jeff\u2019 is taken from:<\/p>\n

https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1drfcul\/you_are_not_you_in_heaven\/<\/a><\/p>\n

Okay so let’s put it all together with an example. Imagine Uncle Jeff. Uncle Jeff was a Christian and made it to Christian Heaven. While on Earth, Uncle Jeff was a hard-edged military veteran who could be a little standoffish. He was grizzled, scarred, and weathered. He would curse from time to time. He liked playing five finger fillet and going to the blackjack tables. He would rant about conspiracies and pedophiles and “the elite”. He wasn’t super well-educated and wasn’t sophisticated when it came to fashion or culture. He was ruggedly macho. I think by now you can basically picture this man.<\/p>\n

But now Uncle Jeff is in Heaven. He looks like a model, dresses like a king, is polite and friendly, is gentle and affectionate, doesn’t curse, doesn’t gamble, doesn’t ramble, has no scars, is smooth and elegant, likes to sing, likes to dance, has nothing but good things to say, and literally knows everything.<\/p>\n

I ask you… Is this your Uncle Jeff? Is there anything about this…\u00a0thing<\/em>\u00a0that reminds you of him? Or is this a creepy approximation of Uncle Jeff that would unnerve even the most lionhearted horror aficionado? I say to you, dear reader, that “Uncle Jeff” is long gone and has been replaced by an impostor. A very poor impostor at that.<\/p>\n

This is just one more element that the inventors of Christianity failed to take into consideration. There is no way that a reconstructed person can be the same person who lived a flesh and blood life here on earth. We are defined by our times, the circumstances of our lives, the age-differential relationships with our family and friends, our good and bad points, our scars, our fears, and our limited knowledge. Whatever \u2018person\u2019 we would be in heaven would not be \u2018us.\u2019<\/p>\n

Imagine there’s no heaven. It’s easy if you <\/a>try.<\/p>\n

(4855) Counting the gods on the sectarian turnpike<\/strong><\/p>\n

James A. Haught (1932-2023) was an author who wrote many books about religion and atheism. The following was one of his screeds against religious authorities who had the dubious inclination to keep inventing more and more supernatural beings. The following was taken from:<\/p>\n

https:\/\/www.debunking-christianity.com\/2024\/06\/theres-too-much-evil-and-cruelty-in.html#more<\/a><\/p>\n

There is another dimension of the Catholic intent-to-fool, in addition to the promise of eternal life. Its\u00a0saint-business\u00a0is thriving. Protestant are impressed only by its weirdness.\u00a0\u00a0One of Haught\u2019s recurring themes is the capacity of religions to imagine gods and the many beings that surround them in the spiritual realm:<\/p>\n

\u201cCounting the number of gods is difficult. Christianity supposedly has three\u2014father, son and Holy Ghost\u2014but what about Satan? Is he a god? What about the Virgin Mary? If she hovers over humanity, miraculously appearing to the faithful, doesn\u2019t that make her a supernatural spirit? What about angels and demons and the \u2018heavenly host\u2019? Are they godlets? What about saints, to whom believers pray? If they exist and receive prayers, they must be supernatural personages. The Catholic Church reveres around 11,000 saints, all canonized upon alleged evidence of miracles. If all 11,000 remain today in the spirit world answering prayers, are they 11,000 semi-gods? If you\u2019re mentally honest, you might see a simple answer: The number of gods and invisible spirits is zero. They\u2019re all figments of the imagination.\u201d<\/p>\n

With all of these supernatural beings swirling about in our midst, doesn\u2019t it seem likely- no inevitable<\/i>– that we\u2019d be witnessing strange and miraculous things happening on a near-daily basis? Haught is correct- we should withhold belief in any of these gods or godlets until and if<\/i> evidence appears sufficient to demonstrate their existence. Until then, we can assume these beings are nothing more than products of human <\/a>imagination.<\/p>\n

(4856) Condensed guide to why Christianity is false<\/strong><\/p>\n

Sometimes, a quick survey of biblical themes is all that\u2019s needed to CONVINCINGLY demonstrate that Christianity is not true, as it\u2019s supported by nothing more than fantasy literature that conflicts with everything we know about the workings of reality. The following was taken from:<\/p>\n

https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/atheism\/comments\/1dsquku\/what_do_you_believe_is_the_strongest_piece_of\/<\/a><\/p>\n

There is a talking snake, a talking bush, a talking donkey, demonic pigs, an invisible trickster, a god who sacrificed himself to himself to save us from himself because of a loophole he made himself, zombies wandering the streets, angels floating down from the sky, a ridiculous story about god wiping out humanity with a flood only to save a creepy old man who gets drunk and naked like a frat boy, magical trees, evil trees, slavery, genocide, nudists who doom humanity by eating a piece of forbidden fruit, misogyny, and a flying zombie carpenter who could save humanity by revealing his zombie self to the whole world but instead only reveals himself to his religious fruitcake friends in a minute geographical area at one of the worst times in history for documenting this godman living amongst us and just hangs out on the beach and does some grilling.<\/p>\n

Being omniscient and knowing that if people didn\u2019t believe in this zombie godman they would go to eternal suffering he didn\u2019t think to hang out here with us and for some reason had to get back to his dad which was also himself. I guess he knew Yahweh had some anger management issues and he had to get back. He also didn\u2019t think to personally record the story in the matter in which he would have liked it to be documented. For that matter, he didn\u2019t even think to have the people who actually witnessed this miraculous story to record it. Instead he relied on anonymous Greek authors far removed in both time and proximity to tell the greatest story ever told.<\/p>\n

All of this got started by an invisible, unproven, supernatural, war god creating everything out of nothing with magic revealed to us by primitive, evangelical, superstitious, violent, genocidal, heterosexual, homophobic, slave owning, male, mostly anonymous, misogynistic, bronze\/iron aged goat herders in an ancient book that cannot be corroborated by any outside sources.<\/p>\n

One reason we can thank the people who wrote the Bible is that they made it very easy for any thinking person to realize that they were giving us a fictional story. Because of that, we can confidently shelve the entirety of it and base our lives on science and <\/a>reason.<\/p>\n

(4857) Mixed messaging<\/strong><\/p>\n

One of the intents of the author of the Gospel of John was to make the point that Jesus had resurrected bodily and to prove that to the doubting apostle, Thomas, who was missing from an earlier appearance by Jesus. But having Jesus enter the room without a physical entrance destroys the thematic drama- only a spirit can pass through walls! The following was taken from:<\/p>\n

https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/AcademicBiblical\/comments\/1ds1mqf\/actual_new_testament_contradictions_that_cant_be\/<\/a><\/p>\n

The oddest contradiction for me isn’t between different gospels but within the Doubting Thomas pericope in John 20.<\/p>\n

Jesus physically appears to the apostles, but Thomas is absent (John 20:19) but the physical Jesus just appeared, though the room was locked, like a 19th Century melodrama, and “showed them his hands and side” (John 20:20).<\/p>\n

The rest of the apostles tell Thomas but he’s not convinced (John 20:24) but a week later, in the same locked room Jesus appears to Thomas.<\/p>\n

The point of the story is to prove a physical, bodily resurrection with wounds and blood but the room is locked and yet Jesus just appears, exactly the way real bodies can’t and don’t, completely screwing the whole point of the story. Real, physical, corporeal bodies don’t just appear in locked rooms but the point of the story is Jesus’ real, physical, corporeal body is what they are seeing.<\/p>\n

There is one logical explanation I can think of. Was resurrected Jesus hiding in a cupboard or under the sofa for a week to impress Thomas?<\/p>\n

An internal contradiction caused by awful story telling.<\/p>\n

The point of John’s doubting Thomas pericope was Jesus’ physical, real body got up out of the grave and his real, normal, everyday human body was standing right in front of them, wounds and all.<\/p>\n

If the storyteller had the physically-resurrected Jesus knock on the door they would have had that. Instead, they chose to make the appearance supernatural, rendering the whole point of the story invalid.<\/p>\n

The author dropped the ball on this one. If you are making up a story, at least make it logically consistent with the point you are trying to <\/a>make.<\/p>\n

(5858) Biblical math<\/strong><\/p>\n

Recent efforts in the United States to insert the Bible into public schools has necessitated the creation of biblical math. In the following, some of the earliest example problems are displayed:<\/p>\n

https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/atheism\/comments\/1dulduq\/need_a_list_of_bible_sex\/<\/a><\/p>\n

Biblical Math<\/strong><\/p>\n

Hallelujah! Thank you to my creative friends for all these great Biblical math problems. They\u2019ll really help the Oklahoma school superintendent\u2019s goal of inserting biblical content into math and science! I\u2019ve collected a multitude of the problems into one post for ease of reading:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines (1 Kings 11:3). If he lay with one wife or concubine every night, but took off one day per week for rest, how many days would it take him to lay with all of his wives and concubines?<\/li>\n
  2. David captured the foreskins of 200 Philistines (1 Samuel 18:27). If David split those foreskins into baskets of 40 foreskins each, how many baskets would he need?<\/li>\n
  3. The prophet Elisha summoned two she-bears to kill 42 children after they mocked him for being bald (2 Kings 2:24) One she-bear mauled twice as many children as the other she-bear. How many kids did each she-bear maul? (Use fractions) (Courtesy of Margo Evans )<\/li>\n
  4. Jael killed General Sisera by driving a tent peg into his skull. (Judges 4:21) If Jael could hammer 1.5 inch per blow and the peg was 9 inches long, how many blows would she need to drive the peg all the way in? (Courtesy of Julie Brady Murdoch )<\/li>\n
  5. Moses parted the Red Sea (Exodus 14:21). If he moved the water in the Red Sea at 1,000 cubic liters per second, how long would it take him to part the Hudson River? (Courtesy of Lynn Nesmith)<\/li>\n
  6. There are 8.7 million animal species on Earth. If Noah took two of each of them onto the ark, how many square cubits of space were required to accommodate all 17.4 million passengers? (Courtesy of Todd Kreisman)<\/li>\n
  7. Elijah killed 450 prophets of Baal (1 Kings 18:40). If it took him one minute to kill each pagan prophet, how long would it take him expressed in hours (Courtesy of James Frese )<\/li>\n
  8. \u00a0Adam and Eve had two sons. One killed the other. So where did all the people come from? (Courtesy of Hilary Dumitrescu )<\/li>\n
  9. \u00a0Jezebel was thrown from a window and died (2 Kings 9:33). If the window was 30 feet high, and she fell at a rate of 16 feet per second squared due to gravity, how many seconds did it take for her to reach the ground? (Use the formula ( s = \\frac{1}{2}gt2 ), where ( s ) is the distance, ( g ) is the acceleration due to gravity, and ( t ) is the time in seconds). (Courtesy of Dana Kienzle)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    One can only hope that public school math students will learn about the Bible\u2019s spectacularly stupid and farcical nonsense while at the same time they are sharpening their math <\/a>skills.<\/p>\n

    (4859) Difficulty in verifying persecution and martyrdom<\/strong><\/p>\n

    Christian apologists like to use the alleged persecution and martrydom of Jesus\u2019 disciples and early followers as evidence for the truth of their faith. Why would someone sacrifice their life for a lie? But there doesn\u2019t exist sufficient evidence to make this claim. The following was taken from:<\/p>\n

    https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/AcademicBiblical\/comments\/1due6nn\/what_does_everyone_make_of_candida_mosss_the_myth\/<\/a><\/p>\n

    The existence of martyrdom and persecution is also really difficult. It is becoming gradually more accepted that the term “Christianos\/Christianus” did not actually come about until much later. Even in spite of criticizing Moss and Brent Shaw, Van der Lans and Bremmer both are forced to come to the conclusion that the term did not come into existence until the late first or second century CE after carefully surveying all of the evidence (here<\/a>).<\/p>\n

    Even worse is that we have an astonishingly poor amount of evidence to suggest any of the apostles suffered “martyrdom.” Martyrdom, to have any epistemological value at all, requires that someone (A) be particularly targeted for their beliefs; (B) be threatened with the end of their life, unless (C) they renounce their beliefs; and (D) that they refuse to renounce their beliefs, and are therefore executed in some fashion. They need all of these points because if they are not given a chance to renounce their beliefs, then we do not know how closely and truly they held to them. As such C and D are needed, otherwise it is meaningless.<\/p>\n

    We have no evidence especially of the most important parts C and D except from one single Roman governor, Pliny the Younger, who never condemned any of the apostles. Even if we accepted the (probably fictional) accounts of Stephen and James the son of Zebedee as historical, these do not satisfy C and D, because they are never offered a chance of renunciation. Similarly, it does not apply to the brother of Jesus (Antiquities<\/em>\u00a020.200), assuming the Josephus reference is authentic which a growing number of scholars dispute (here<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0here<\/a>).<\/p>\n

    Even more recently, the earliest evidence for the deaths of Peter and Paul has been suggested to actually have been the fault of Christians themselves. David Eastman argues that Christian uproar led to their execution at the hands of the Romans, who were wishing to quell civil disobedience. As a result, Peter and Paul were not executed for their faith, but because of the ruckus of their followers (here<\/a>). I have taken this one step further and pointed out that all the evidence in 1 Clement 4-6 actually is internally consistent with Christians killing their own leaders. This is the thesis of forthcoming paper of mine in the\u00a0Journal of Early Christian History<\/em>\u00a0(entitled “Murder Among Brothers: The Deaths of Peter and Paul Reconsidered”).<\/p>\n

    The reality of the situation is that we have very little evidence the apostles suffered martyrdom, and I would argue that there is poor evidence that\u00a0any<\/em>\u00a0Christian suffered targeted persecution in the first century CE at all. So, I, along with\u00a0many<\/em>\u00a0others, hold that Moss’ work is highly valuable and problematizes the entire notion of first century persecution in a variety of ways.<\/p>\n

    A lack of evidence in this case is significant because if the alleged faith-based persecution had taken place, its documentation would likely have been robust. Civil-based executions would have received less <\/a>press.<\/p>\n

    (4860) Paul gives different answer than Jesus<\/strong><\/p>\n

    There is a story in the synoptic gospels about a rich man asking Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life. The answer that Jesus gives is wholly at odds with what Paul would theoretically give. The following was taken from:<\/p>\n

    https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/AcademicBiblical\/comments\/1dveo0z\/how_accepted_is_the_pauline_christianity_thesis\/<\/a><\/p>\n

    This is in Matthew, Mark, and Luke. This man comes up to Jesus and he says to Jesus “what do I have to do to have eternal life?” (Matthew 19:16-30, Mark 10:17-22, Luke 18:18-25)<\/p>\n

    And Jesus has an immediate response. He says “keep the Commandments” … “sell everything and give to the poor and then he’ll have Treasures in Heaven….”<\/p>\n

    This is this exercise I used to give my students… I would say “okay now, the\u00a0same person<\/em>\u00a0who came up to Jesus, he walks away. He can’t do it. He can’t sell everything. He’s rich. He’s got a lot of money. There’s no way he’s gonna sell everything. So he walks away and he’s kind of upset.”<\/p>\n

    So I say “so suppose 20 years later Jesus has died, and\u00a0this person<\/em>\u00a0comes up to Paul,\u00a0the same guy,<\/em>\u00a0and he says “teacher, what must I do to have eternal life?”<\/p>\n

    Does Paul say “keep the commandments?”<\/p>\n

    No.<\/p>\n

    Paul’s whole point is that following the Jewish law is not going to make you right with God. You can’t be right with God by following the law. Of course you\u00a0should<\/em>\u00a0keep the commandments, but it’s not going to give you salvation. Paul says “believe in the death and resurrection of Jesus. Jesus died for your sins. Accept him, and believe in the resurrection, and be baptized, and you’ll be saved.”<\/p>\n

    Nothing about keeping commandments or selling all your goods.<\/p>\n

    To be consistent, in the three synoptic tellings of this story, Jesus should have answered, \u201cYou must believe that I am the son of God and that you accept me as your savior and the one who will eventually take on the punishment for all of your sins <\/i>and the sins of the world<\/i>\u2019 <\/i>-i.e. nothing about the commandments or divulging wealth. The mismatch between Jesus\u2019 salvation plan and Paul\u2019s is a fatal flaw with Christianity. Jesus\u2019 answer would allow Muslims, Hindus, and atheists a pathway to heaven, whereas Paul\u2019s answer would exclude all of these, sending them straight to <\/a>hell.<\/p>\n

    (4861) Sensing what isn’t there<\/strong><\/p>\n

    A new theory, termed hagioptasia, recognizes the human tendency to view natural phenomena as having supernatural elements. This all by itself is enough to explain human belief in spirituality in all of its forms as well as the development of thousands of religions. The following was taken from:<\/p>\n

    https:\/\/hagioptasia.wordpress.com\/2024\/06\/23\/hagioptasia-the-evolutionary-foundation-of-spiritual-experience\/<\/a><\/p>\n

    Spirituality, with its themes of transcendence, sacredness, connection, and the search for meaning, has been a universal feature of human cultures throughout history. My theory of \u2018hagioptasia\u2019 offers a new explanation for this enduring phenomenon. Hagioptasia is the natural human tendency to perceive an extraordinary sense of \u2018specialness\u2019 in certain people, places, or things (Johnson & Laidler, 2020).<\/p>\n

    The writer and theologian C.S. Lewis captures this sentiment in\u00a0The Pilgrim\u2019s Regress<\/em>, describing a distinct but mysterious longing evoked by ordinary experiences:<\/p>\n

    \u201cThat unnameable something, desire for which pierces us like a rapier at the smell of bonfire, the sound of wild ducks flying overhead, the title of\u00a0The Well at the World\u2019s End<\/em>, the opening lines of\u00a0Kubla Khan<\/em>, the morning cobwebs in late summer, or the noise of falling waves.\u201d<\/p>\n

    Lewis proposed that such desires indicate a connection with a spiritual realm, bolstering his Christian beliefs:<\/p>\n

    \u201cCreatures are not born with desires unless satisfaction for those desires exists\u2026 If I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world.\u201d<\/p>\n

    Like Lewis, I pondered these feelings, but my observations led me to a naturalistic explanation. I theorized that this mysterious, abstract sense of \u2018specialness\u2019 is not a supernatural calling but an evolved motivational drive. This drive compels us to value certain aspects of our environment and shared social constructs, shaping perceptions and guiding the behaviours of our ancestors in ways that promote social cohesion and survival.<\/p>\n

    Collaborative research with psychologist Dr. John A. Johnson provided strong support for hagioptasia theory and revealed that most individuals experience this elusive sense of specialness from early childhood. Our findings indicate that hagioptasia shapes both personal and collective perceptions. Individually, people develop unique hagioptasic notions, akin to those described by C.S. Lewis. However, this tendency extends beyond personal experiences; it is also socialised into shared cultural values. Celebrities, status symbols, and religious icons all exemplify how hagioptasia is woven into the fabric of communal life.<\/p>\n

    In these contexts, hagioptasia evokes powerful emotional responses such as desire, awe, nostalgia, reverence, deference, insecurity, and competitive envy. These emotions play crucial roles in establishing and maintaining social hierarchies and cohesion through shared values. By understanding hagioptasia, we gain insights into the underlying psychological mechanisms that drive these collective behaviours.<\/p>\n

    Hagioptasia translates easily into spiritual and religious constructs as it predisposes us to seek and recognize concepts of \u2018sacredness\u2019 and the supernatural, making religious experiences and spiritual practices emotionally resonant. For instance, in a survey of 2,943 participants, when asked to respond to the statement, \u201cEveryday places or things from my childhood can still hold a \u2018magical\u2019 quality for me,\u201d 64% agreed, 18.1% neither agreed nor disagreed, and only 17.8% disagreed. These results highlight the natural human inclination towards perceiving the supernatural in ordinary experiences, as well as illustrating the illusory nature of hagioptasia.<\/p>\n

    By fostering attachments, imbuing experiences with a sense of the supernatural, enhancing memories, and driving the search for meaning, the influence of hagioptasia can account for all the core aspects of spirituality. As we continue to explore the implications of this theory, hagioptasia promises to provide further insights into the intricate relationship between human evolution, psychology, and culture.<\/p>\n

    Hagioptasia is conceptualized as a tendency to perceive that certain persons and places are preternaturally \u201cspecial\u201d and as a desire to participate in that otherworldly specialness when, objectively, there is really nothing unearthly about the person or situation. It explains why humans have created thousands of religions, as well as belief in a myriad of un-scientific phenomena such as deja vu, past life, ghosts, auras, <\/a>etc.<\/p>\n

    (4862) Jesus of synoptics versus John<\/strong><\/p>\n

    The gospels present two principal descriptions of Jesus, and they are irretrievably contradictory. One image is presented in the Gospels of Mark, Matthew, and Luke, the other in John. The following was taken from:<\/p>\n

    https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1dswjhb\/the_jesus_of_synoptics_vs_the_jesus_of_john_two\/<\/a><\/p>\n

    As I have discussed in a previous post, the Bible cannot be considered an inerrant text. Each book was written for a particular audience and purpose, shaped by the cultural and theological assumptions of its time. A clear example of this can be seen in the depictions of Jesus found in the synoptic gospels of Mark, Matthew and Luke versus that in the Gospel of John.<\/p>\n

    The synoptic gospels present Jesus firmly as the Jewish Messiah, as can be seen in their consistent references to him as the “King of the Jews”. Their Jesus performs miracles not just to showcase divine power, but specifically to prove that he fulfills the role of Messiah promised in Jewish scripture and tradition. Indeed, many Jewish prophets were said to have displayed miraculous deeds. The synoptics also emphasize Jewish teachings and practices like prayer, purity laws and temple worship. This strongly suggests their intended readers were among early Jewish apocalyptic groups who expected an imminent political and military deliverance by their messiah.<\/p>\n

    In contrast, the Jesus of John could not be further from the militant messiah figure expected by these Jewish sects. John’s gospel contains very little about Jesus’ Jewish identity or teachings, instead focusing on his divine nature and role. With no miracles meant to prove messianic credentials, John presents Jesus’ works solely as demonstrations of supernatural power. More importantly, John’s Jesus is described using the unmistakable language of a Greco-Roman divinity – he is called the “Son of God”. This echoes the way Greek and Roman myths portrayed demigod heroes conceived by relations between gods and mortals, like Perseus or Hercules.<\/p>\n

    The evidence clearly indicates the synoptic Jesus was crafted for a Jewish audience anticipating a political savior, while John’s divine, miracle-working Jesus was tailored to better suit the religious sensibilities of gentiles in the polytheistic Greco-Roman world, acquainted with stories of supernatural demigods. Rather than presenting one objective historical Jesus, the gospels offer irreconcilably different portraits, shaped by the theological assumptions and intended readers of their individual authors. This speaks to the Bible as an inspired religious document, not an inerrant historical record. The gospels do not provide a singular, definitive picture of who Jesus was, but rather reflections of how Christians in different times and cultures came to understand him.<\/p>\n

    Most historians will opine that the three synoptic gospels are more historical than the Gospel of John, (assuming Jesus to have been a real person) simply because they were written earlier and make less spectacular claims. Taken as such, it can be confidently stated that including the Gospel of John in the Bible was a <\/a>mistake.<\/p>\n

    (4863) Jesus shouldn\u2019t have revealed heaven or hell<\/strong><\/p>\n

    Jesus made a mistake when he (allegedly) revealed the existence of heaven and hell, thereby removing the ability of people to do good for goodness sake rather than a hope for reward or fear of punishment. Yahweh did a good job throughout the period of the Old Testament concealing the presence of these post-life locations, but Jesus \u2018let the cat out of the bag.\u2019 The following was taken from:<\/p>\n

    https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1dwt1wu\/god_shouldnt_have_revealed_the_concept_of_heaven\/<\/a><\/p>\n

    <\/a>God shouldn’t have revealed the concept of Heaven and Hell if he wanted the sincerest results of the test. A social experiment where you know you’ll get a reward if you participate, is useless.<\/p>\n

    It’s undeniable that a large contingent of people are<\/p>\n