Ask an Atheist
- Thread starter SkepticJosh
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
- Status
A
It's also important to note that old covenant Judaism and new covenant Christianity suffered no syncretism from paganism, Hellenism, Gnosticism, etc... I did my thesis on that subject. Christianity was not dependent on or influenced by these other worldviews though the reverse did sometimes occur. Here's an introductory article:
http://christianshelpingourworld.or...e-of-pagan-hellenistic-and-gnostic-syncretism
It is also noteworthy that various religious organizations drifted from the truth and fell into theological and doctrinal areas over time (necessitating reform). Furthermore, as Rodney Stark states:
"unless checked by other forces, powerful institutions and organizations tend to suppress dissent and nonconformity, and to impose their views and interests on anyone they can."
The three major classes of organization (e.g. political, religious, non-religious/atheistic) all have entities that engaged in this behavior.
It's important to differentiate between those entities that did so in contradiction to a true interpretation of their epistemology and those that did so within a true interpretation of their epistemology.
http://christianshelpingourworld.or...e-of-pagan-hellenistic-and-gnostic-syncretism
It is also noteworthy that various religious organizations drifted from the truth and fell into theological and doctrinal areas over time (necessitating reform). Furthermore, as Rodney Stark states:
"unless checked by other forces, powerful institutions and organizations tend to suppress dissent and nonconformity, and to impose their views and interests on anyone they can."
The three major classes of organization (e.g. political, religious, non-religious/atheistic) all have entities that engaged in this behavior.
It's important to differentiate between those entities that did so in contradiction to a true interpretation of their epistemology and those that did so within a true interpretation of their epistemology.
A
Agreed. There are numerous parallels to this saying in Greco-Roman, oriental and Jewish writings. There is a particularly close rabbinic tradition in b. Šabb. 31a: “What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow creatures.”
Although a negative formulation along these lines is much more common than the positive formulation of Matthew 7:12, the latter is found in some Jewish writings (Ep. Arist. 207; T. Naph. 1; 2 Enoch 61:1); hence it is a mistake to claim that the positive form of the Golden Rule is distinctively Christian.
Although a negative formulation along these lines is much more common than the positive formulation of Matthew 7:12, the latter is found in some Jewish writings (Ep. Arist. 207; T. Naph. 1; 2 Enoch 61:1); hence it is a mistake to claim that the positive form of the Golden Rule is distinctively Christian.
Are you sure about that? I looked up only three for comparison. The ancient Roman week was 8 days in length (they switched to the 7 day week when they adopted the Julian calendar); the ancient Egyptians had a 10 day week; and the Mayans had two separate systems: one was a week of 13 days and the other was a week of 20 days.
_____________________
See Sirk, we are still coming up with new things to discus.
_____________________
See Sirk, we are still coming up with new things to discus.
A
The earliest ancient archeological sources record a seven-day week in ancient Babylon prior to 600 BCE. The Babylonians based it on the sun, moon, and five planetary "gods."
In the Hebrew Bible; however, the week began on “Sunday” and ended on the Sabbath forming a seven day week. The weeks were then designated by the names of the twenty-four priestly courses (1 Chron 24:7–18) which began their temple service on the sabbath (see Sacrifice and Temple Service). Zechariah, of the priestly division of Abijah, was serving his rotation when the angel appeared and announced the birth of his son, John the Baptist (Lk 1:5–23).
In Judaism, the seven-day cycle of creation foreordains the observance of the sabbath (Gen 2:2; Ex 20:10).
In the Hebrew Bible; however, the week began on “Sunday” and ended on the Sabbath forming a seven day week. The weeks were then designated by the names of the twenty-four priestly courses (1 Chron 24:7–18) which began their temple service on the sabbath (see Sacrifice and Temple Service). Zechariah, of the priestly division of Abijah, was serving his rotation when the angel appeared and announced the birth of his son, John the Baptist (Lk 1:5–23).
In Judaism, the seven-day cycle of creation foreordains the observance of the sabbath (Gen 2:2; Ex 20:10).
1)
Did Jesus Exist?: The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth: Bart D. Ehrman: 9780062206442: Amazon.com: Books
Proving History: Bayes's Theorem and the Quest for the Historical Jesus: Richard Carrier: 9781616145590: Amazon.com: Books
there was no Jesus, there is no God: A Scholarly Examination of the Scientific, Historical, and Philosophical Evidence & Arguments for Monotheism: Raphael Lataster: 9781492234418: Amazon.com: Books
2)
Is there really a consensus of scholars on historical facts about Jesus?
3)
Credibility analysis of NPR.ORG | Web Design and Publishing
Also the actual content was that of scholar Bart Ehram, it just happened to be on NPR website
4)
A Silence That Screams - (No contemporary historical accounts for "jesus) | The Rational Response Squad
5)
The Dating of the Gospels
How Is the Date of Composition of the Gospels Estimated? - Biblical Hermeneutics Stack Exchange
Did Jesus Exist?: The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth: Bart D. Ehrman: 9780062206442: Amazon.com: Books
Proving History: Bayes's Theorem and the Quest for the Historical Jesus: Richard Carrier: 9781616145590: Amazon.com: Books
there was no Jesus, there is no God: A Scholarly Examination of the Scientific, Historical, and Philosophical Evidence & Arguments for Monotheism: Raphael Lataster: 9781492234418: Amazon.com: Books
2)
Is there really a consensus of scholars on historical facts about Jesus?
3)
Credibility analysis of NPR.ORG | Web Design and Publishing
Also the actual content was that of scholar Bart Ehram, it just happened to be on NPR website
4)
A Silence That Screams - (No contemporary historical accounts for "jesus) | The Rational Response Squad
5)
The Dating of the Gospels
How Is the Date of Composition of the Gospels Estimated? - Biblical Hermeneutics Stack Exchange
Are you sure about that? I looked up only three for comparison. The ancient Roman week was 8 days in length (they switched to the 7 day week when they adopted the Julian calendar); the ancient Egyptians had a 10 day week; and the Mayans had two separate systems: one was a week of 13 days and the other was a week of 20 days.
_____________________
See Sirk, we are still coming up with new things to discus.
_____________________
See Sirk, we are still coming up with new things to discus.
A six, eight or ten day week just wouldn't work as well. God's design of the seven day week works best.
In Exodus 16, we see that God required the Israelites to follow a seven day pattern for gathering miraculous manna in the desert wilderness after the Exodus from Egypt.
In the four gospel accounts of Jesus, we see that Jesus used the sabbath rest day to do miraculous works of healing. John 5 and the healing of the lame man at the pool of Bethesda is one such healing.
A
You don't know it doseofreality but you've invoked a bad row of dominos. Ehrman's work is based on the incorrect model particularly promoted by Walter Bauer and that model has been soundly refuted by orthodox modern scholars meaning that your #2 link which states the opposite is patently untrue.
But then that same link asserts there is no actual consensus amongst scholars for the historicity of Jesus Christ and then makes great misrepresentations to "prove" it. An outright lie. The truth is that the vast majority of Phd biblical scholars both past and present, including even Bauer and Ehrman, support a historical Jesus. I don't know what that guy's smoking but it's not tobacco.
Now understand that Raphael Lataster bases his work on the same false model as Ehrman. Hence, the analogy to a bad row of dominos.
Read 'The Heresy of Orthodoxy: How Contemporary Culture's Fascination with Diversity Has Reshaped Our Understanding of Early Christianity' by Andreas J. Köstenberger (Author), Michael J. Kruger (Author), and Ian Howard Marshall (Foreword) as a starting point to see how modern scholarship has refuted Bauer's false model and subsequent false assertions with respect to Christianity.
So Bauer, Ehrman, and Lataster are all working off a false refuted model and adding to it their own assertions many of which are fallacious. One of many examples of this is how they construct conflicts behind variant readings and then posit this conflict as a historical absolute back onto the original. And, they are inconsistent in the use of criteria when they do so because they don't want to introduce evidence disproving themselves. Furthermore, the set of sources they invoke as earlier have not even been recognized by critics to be plausible as a whole. They use straw men, ignore that which refutes their false view, etc... I could go on and on and on and on.
The ignorant unbeliever then reads Bauer, Ehrman, and Lataster and feels justified in their unbelief when literally: it's the blind leading the blind who then repeat the misinformation in their blogs etc...
That last link in #5 is wrong. If you want to read a good introduction on Gospel dating, I recommend 'The Many Gospels of Jesus' by Philip Comfort & Jason Dreisbach and 'The Origin of the Bible' by F. F. Bruce, J. I. Packer, Philip Comfort, and Carl F. H. Henry.
But then that same link asserts there is no actual consensus amongst scholars for the historicity of Jesus Christ and then makes great misrepresentations to "prove" it. An outright lie. The truth is that the vast majority of Phd biblical scholars both past and present, including even Bauer and Ehrman, support a historical Jesus. I don't know what that guy's smoking but it's not tobacco.
Now understand that Raphael Lataster bases his work on the same false model as Ehrman. Hence, the analogy to a bad row of dominos.
Read 'The Heresy of Orthodoxy: How Contemporary Culture's Fascination with Diversity Has Reshaped Our Understanding of Early Christianity' by Andreas J. Köstenberger (Author), Michael J. Kruger (Author), and Ian Howard Marshall (Foreword) as a starting point to see how modern scholarship has refuted Bauer's false model and subsequent false assertions with respect to Christianity.
So Bauer, Ehrman, and Lataster are all working off a false refuted model and adding to it their own assertions many of which are fallacious. One of many examples of this is how they construct conflicts behind variant readings and then posit this conflict as a historical absolute back onto the original. And, they are inconsistent in the use of criteria when they do so because they don't want to introduce evidence disproving themselves. Furthermore, the set of sources they invoke as earlier have not even been recognized by critics to be plausible as a whole. They use straw men, ignore that which refutes their false view, etc... I could go on and on and on and on.
The ignorant unbeliever then reads Bauer, Ehrman, and Lataster and feels justified in their unbelief when literally: it's the blind leading the blind who then repeat the misinformation in their blogs etc...
That last link in #5 is wrong. If you want to read a good introduction on Gospel dating, I recommend 'The Many Gospels of Jesus' by Philip Comfort & Jason Dreisbach and 'The Origin of the Bible' by F. F. Bruce, J. I. Packer, Philip Comfort, and Carl F. H. Henry.
That's not the point though. You indicated that the 7 day week was common around the world, implying, I think, that the ancients all got their calendars from God. I showed that the Romans, Egyptians, and Mayans had different sources; but is there also the possibility that the Hebrew's got theirs from the Babylonians? I wouldn't rule it out. “The calendar used by Jews has evolved over time. The basic structural features of the early calendar are thought to have been influenced by the Babylonian calendar, including the seven-day week, the lunisolar intercalary adjustment and the names of the months.”
Hebrew calendar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hebrew calendar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A
The Hebrews had calendering before the Babylonian exile. The study of astronomy in ancient Judaism was largely due to the need of fixing the dates of the festivals. The command (Deut. xvi. 1), "Keep the month of Abib," made it necessary to be acquainted with the position of the sun; and the command, "Also observe the moon and sanctify it," made it necessary to study the phases of the moon.
The ancient Hebrews borrowed from Babylonian technology and following the period of the Babylonian Captivity (597-539 BCE) the Hebrew calendar became closely related with the Babylonian calendar.
But note that the months of the Jewish calendar are referred to mostly by number in the Bible for the simple reason that the numbers existed in the Hebrew calendar before the Babylonian exile and are found in the ancient Torah where the months are numbered.
The names of the months of the Jewish calendar were adopted during the time of Erza, after Israel returned from the Babylonian exile of 70 years. The names for the months are actually of Babylonian origin brought back to Israel by the returning exiles.
The Babylonians didn't invent the Hebrew calendar but they influenced it substantially.
The ancient Hebrews borrowed from Babylonian technology and following the period of the Babylonian Captivity (597-539 BCE) the Hebrew calendar became closely related with the Babylonian calendar.
But note that the months of the Jewish calendar are referred to mostly by number in the Bible for the simple reason that the numbers existed in the Hebrew calendar before the Babylonian exile and are found in the ancient Torah where the months are numbered.
The names of the months of the Jewish calendar were adopted during the time of Erza, after Israel returned from the Babylonian exile of 70 years. The names for the months are actually of Babylonian origin brought back to Israel by the returning exiles.
The Babylonians didn't invent the Hebrew calendar but they influenced it substantially.
Not to worry. If Ehrman followed Bauer's lead it is because the majority of liberal scholarship today takes much the same view. Essentially the conservative view of orthodox scholarship is offended by the claims Bauer made. If AgeofKnowledge is correct, and I suspect he is, in their minds they think they've discounted him.
“Bauer concluded that what came to be known as orthodoxy was just one of numerous forms of Christianity in the early centuries. It was the form of Christianity practiced in Rome that exercised the uniquely dominant influence over the development of orthodoxy[3] and acquired the majority of converts over time. This was largely due to the greater resources available to the Christians in Rome and due to the conversion to Christianity of the Roman Emperor Constantine I. Practitioners of what became orthodoxy then rewrote the history of the conflict making it appear that this view had always been the majority one. Writings in support of other views were systematically destroyed.” Walter Bauer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Ehrman is pretty much middle of the road, from what I’ve read, and what little I’ve read on Bauer leads me to think liberal scholarship has not abandoned him.
The Bauer Hypothesis of Christian Origins (above in bold type) is “A fashionable stance today, especially in liberal theological circles, [which] seeks to explain early Christianity in terms of a set of highly diverse movements...” The bauer Hypothsis of Christian Origins (Tekton Education and Apologetics Ministries). If the Bauer Hypothesis is “a fashionable stance today” it can hardly be said to have been “soundly refuted.”
“Bauer concluded that what came to be known as orthodoxy was just one of numerous forms of Christianity in the early centuries. It was the form of Christianity practiced in Rome that exercised the uniquely dominant influence over the development of orthodoxy[3] and acquired the majority of converts over time. This was largely due to the greater resources available to the Christians in Rome and due to the conversion to Christianity of the Roman Emperor Constantine I. Practitioners of what became orthodoxy then rewrote the history of the conflict making it appear that this view had always been the majority one. Writings in support of other views were systematically destroyed.” Walter Bauer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Ehrman is pretty much middle of the road, from what I’ve read, and what little I’ve read on Bauer leads me to think liberal scholarship has not abandoned him.
The Bauer Hypothesis of Christian Origins (above in bold type) is “A fashionable stance today, especially in liberal theological circles, [which] seeks to explain early Christianity in terms of a set of highly diverse movements...” The bauer Hypothsis of Christian Origins (Tekton Education and Apologetics Ministries). If the Bauer Hypothesis is “a fashionable stance today” it can hardly be said to have been “soundly refuted.”
Do not forget to include that Abraham was, in fact, from Chaldea. The seven day week is from God. Although, you have me because I can't prove it. The day is determined by the sun. The month was/is determined by the moon. The year is based on the earth's revolving around the sun. But there is no reason for the week outside of the fact that it is from God. And just because some nations have played with using a different number of days in a week doesn't change that.
What's up Cycel. Have you abandoned the "Is there such a thing as an atheist?" thread. I haven't seen you in a while.
What's up Cycel. Have you abandoned the "Is there such a thing as an atheist?" thread. I haven't seen you in a while.
Yes, for myself it makes a great deal of sense. I think you were most likely addressing DoseOfReality, but if I may I’d like to respond briefly. First, giving you any kind of reasonable response in a short space is next to impossible. I began with two or three doubts about God when I was about 10 years old and in my efforts to satisfy those questions the doubts mushroomed. The more I delved into it the more the doubts grew and by the time I was 12 years old I had lost my belief in God, though I didn’t know the term atheist at the time. Occasionally I slipped back into belief, but by the time I was 16 I’d joined the ranks of what you might call positive or strong atheism. What brought me to this belief was more a matter of historical consideration, I think, than science. My discovery that views on God had changed since Old Testament times showed me that belief in God had evolved. If God evolved then God was a cultural manifestation and that recognition turned me into an atheist. In a nutshell, I think, that is what happened. However, I might mention that some years ago I wrote a religious autobiography in an attempt to discern just how the atheism had come about. The essay is about 24 or so typed pages in length. So you can see, I have left quite a lot out, and truth be told it could probably stand to be somewhat longer.
PS. I'll probably regret posting this as it raises further issues which time alone might prevent me from adequately answering.
PS. I'll probably regret posting this as it raises further issues which time alone might prevent me from adequately answering.
- Status