need help with my next college project

[Linzyhop]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

Interesting comparison. What exactly is the difference? What is 'educated faith'?

blind faith is something that mostly children have. faith without a basis. believing something completely because you were told this is how it is. some adults are like this too. They simply believe in what they believe because they've always believed it and never stepped outside the box.

Now i'm not saying believing in the same thing since you were a child is wrong, but it's good to be educated about what you believe in. If you're Christian, read the Bible and be educated about your religion, Muslim, read the Koran.... explore it. understand it. know why you believe the things you believe. be educated.

If you know about the other religions on the world and are a firm believer in your faith, I can respect that. If you believe what you believe simply because you were told to and don't know anything else, well then, that's ignorant faith as far as I'm concerned.

[Dumpy Dooby]

Originally Posted by BigRob

Thanks for all the info Dumpy, I'm sure I'll put some to use as the speech takes shape.

You're welcome, but I'm curious to know how you intend to cite your source.

various posts. Dumpy Dooby. need help with my next college project. Liberty Lounge Political Forums.
www.libertylounge.net/forums/12598-need-help-my-next-college-project.html (accessed: April 12, 2007).

(ps- im kidding)

[BigRob]

Originally Posted by Linzyhop

blind faith is something that mostly children have. faith without a basis. believing something completely because you were told this is how it is. some adults are like this too. They simply believe in what they believe because they've always believed it and never stepped outside the box.

Now i'm not saying believing in the same thing since you were a child is wrong, but it's good to be educated about what you believe in. If you're Christian, read the Bible and be educated about your religion, Muslim, read the Koran.... explore it. understand it. know why you believe the things you believe. be educated.

If you know about the other religions on the world and are a firm believer in your faith, I can respect that. If you believe what you believe simply because you were told to and don't know anything else, well then, that's ignorant faith as far as I'm concerned.

That was well said.

Anyway, I've been trying to work on this on top of other papers I'm writing and some personal matters already posted elsewhere.

Here's my final list of audience questions:

1)Can you trust someone who has lied to you?
2)Do you believe in God?
3)Do you believe the Bible is the infallible word of God?
4)Do you believe God "inspired" man to write the Bible?
5) Do you believe God lies/deceives?
6)Have you read the Bible?
7)Do you believe the Bible to be a historically accurate book?
8)Have you ever quoted the Bible?
9)Do you consider yourself a follower of the Bibles teachings?
10)Would it matter to you if you found out the Bible was inaccurate?

I'll be passing these out tomorrow and hope to get them back tomorrow as well. I'll post the results here.

I hope the results don't get scued due to the fact my topic got brought up by the teacher and I heard the gasp as I said I was going to use the Bible to disprove itself. I hope there's not going to be a bias towards my questions since people will have a few days to think about my topic.

My teacher actually said it would be hard to disprove the Bible. I said the hard part is narrowing it down to 5-7 minutes because I could easily do an hour with the material I have.

But right now my other projects are done and this is my main focus for the next week. Right now I'm looking through all the verses and trying to see which ones will have the most impact. I'm also trying to decide if I want to use powerpoint of not. I don't have it here, so it's something I'd have to do at school, and it would be a hell of a lot of typing to get all the verses done.

I almost forgot, Dumpy, was the T. Paine listed in your post Thomas "Common Sense" Paine ?

[Linzyhop]

Originally Posted by BigRob

That was well said.

thank you.

Anyway, I've been trying to work on this on top of other papers I'm writing and some personal matters already posted elsewhere.

Here's my final list of audience questions:

1)Can you trust someone who has lied to you?
2)Do you believe in God?
3)Do you believe the Bible is the infallible word of God?
4)Do you believe God "inspired" man to write the Bible?
5) Do you believe God lies/deceives?
6)Have you read the Bible?
7)Do you believe the Bible to be a historically accurate book?
8)Have you ever quoted the Bible?
9)Do you consider yourself a follower of the Bibles teachings?
10)Would it matter to you if you found out the Bible was inaccurate?

I'll be passing these out tomorrow and hope to get them back tomorrow as well. I'll post the results here.

I hope the results don't get scued due to the fact my topic got brought up by the teacher and I heard the gasp as I said I was going to use the Bible to disprove itself. I hope there's not going to be a bias towards my questions since people will have a few days to think about my topic.

My teacher actually said it would be hard to disprove the Bible. I said the hard part is narrowing it down to 5-7 minutes because I could easily do an hour with the material I have.

But right now my other projects are done and this is my main focus for the next week. Right now I'm looking through all the verses and trying to see which ones will have the most impact. I'm also trying to decide if I want to use powerpoint of not. I don't have it here, so it's something I'd have to do at school, and it would be a hell of a lot of typing to get all the verses done.

well regardless, I would love to see what you come up with. I'm always interested in reading about things like this. It would be interesting to be a fly on the wall in that classroom. Good Luck!

[BigRob]

Here are the results of my questionaire. i passed out 19. Not all the answers add up to 19 since some people did not answer every question.


1)Can you trust someone who has lied to you? 3 yes, 2 sometimes, 14 no

2)Do you believe in God? 18 yes , 1 I don't know

3)Do you believe the Bible is the infallible word of God? 8 yes, 3 sometimes, 4 no, 3 I don't know

4)Do you believe God "inspired" man to write the Bible? 9 yes, 2 some, 5 no, 1 I don't know

5) Do you believe God lies/deceives? 3 yes, 3 sometimes, 13 no

6)Have you read the Bible? 13 yes, 2 some, 3 no,

7)Do you believe the Bible to be a historically accurate book? 7 yes, 4 some, 5 no, 3 I don't know

8)Have you ever quoted the Bible? 12 yes, 1 some, 6 no

9)Do you consider yourself a follower of the Bibles teachings? 8 yes, 7 sometime, 4 no

10)Would it matter to you if you found out the Bible was inaccurate? 9 yes, 2 some, 7 no


There were some funny answers too. When asked about if God lies/deceives somebody wrote "he has lawyer tendencies."

And there were inconsistent answers as well. One person believed the Bible was writen by men inspired by God yet it could be historically inaccurate since it was written by men.

If God told them what to say shouldn't it all be the same and accurate?

And when asked if it would matter if hey found out the Bible was inaccurate one person answered "It is not. Those who try the Bible wrong have not actually dug deep enough into the Bible to understand and are fools. The Bible states that."


Now to use this data to decide how I want to go about this. There's lots of info I can use (thanks guys) and it's just a matter of narrowing it down. I thinking about focusing on 1) using the Bible to disprove Jesus as the messiah 2) Jesus did not historically exist anyway. 3) Jesus is a amalgam of other beliefs.

At this point I'm really trying to avoid using a dozen slides of powerpoint with Bible verses.

And I also found out it's been moved up and now my speech is due Monday

I guess I know what I'm doing this weekend.

[up|dn]

My biggest problem with the the Bible as "God's infallible Word" is the nature of language. Language is not static, but it constantly changes and evolves. To say that God would reveal his will in something that is inherently fallible and changing seems contradictory in and of itself. This is obviously complicated by the fact that we have none of the original manuscripts, so going back to the originals isn't even possible.

Even more complicated is the fact that the Christian scriptures arose out of tradition. The scriptures did not come first, but were developed in order to defend the orthodox beliefs, and in some ways to defend against other scriptures that were being developed by heretics like Marcion. Some people will obviously argue this, but the scriptures (New Testament) we have wasn't seen in the current order until 367AD.

You can try to come up with contradictory statements, but theologians have had many centuries to come up with explanations for those. For me, the biggest contradictions come from the historical settings that you get from Paul's letters, and the traditions and legends about him in the book of Acts of the Apostles. They seem completely at odds with each other.

There are also historical/geographical mistakes in the Gospels, and also places where the author has erroneously used a mistranslation from the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament. There are (sometimes large) variations between different manuscripts. For example, the last section of Mark, basically everything after the 'empty tomb' has been added later because it doesn't show up in early manuscripts.

Since scholars have amost universally agreed that the Gospel of Mark is earliest, and used as a source by both Matthew and Luke, that begs the question why they would take Mark's works and add theological changes to the text in order to make certain points. You can see this in the story of Jesus' baptism, for example, where Mark differs in interesting ways from the other synoptic gospels, and some things have been glossed over, while other things have been changed to make a stronger case for certain theological points.

In the end, though, none of this is going to change the fact that Christians believe it is still the inspired Word of God, and that the proper interpretation can come only through the Holy Spirit and God's grace. This includes any things we would see as errors, contradictions, etc. "God works in mysterious ways, etc."

[up|dn]

Just so you get an idea of how complicated this can get, one of the earliest Christian theologians, Origen, had this to say about scriptural interpretation:

He distinguishes three different ways of reading scriptures:
1) The somatic, or literal, philological sense, (from soma, "body"), which everybody can understand and which is identical with the historical truth.
2) The psychic or moral sense: "psychic" in the original sense of that which belongs to the soul. The moral sense means the application of the Biblical text to our situation. It is the existential application of the Biblical texts to ourselves.
3) The spiritual sense: it is understandable only to those who are perfect, not morally but in the sense of being completely introduced into the meaning of Christianity; it is the mystical sense. There are some cases in which the Biblical text has only a mystical sense; then this is at the same time the literal one. But ordinarily it is a literal sense distinguished from the mystical sense. The way in which the mystical sense is to be found is through the allegoric method, the method of finding the hidden sense behind the texts.

This was written before the full formation of the Christian New Testament, but as a means of interpretation, I think it still stands. There are different levels of interpretation, so whether something is literally or historically true does not necessarily mean anything. Just a thought.

[Dumpy Dooby]

Originally Posted by BigRob

I almost forgot, Dumpy, was the T. Paine listed in your post Thomas "Common Sense" Paine ?

Yeah, it's the same guy. It's from The Prospect Papers, and it was entitled "Tower Of Babel."

The Tower Of Babel

The story of the tower of Babel is told in Genesis xi. It begins thus: "And the whole earth [it was but a very little part of it they knew] was of one language and of one speech. And it came to pass as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar, and they dwelt there. And they said one to another, Go to, let us make brick and burn them thoroughly, and they had brick for stone, and slime had they for mortar. And they said, Go to, let us build us a city, and a tower whose top may reach unto heaven, and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth. And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower which the children of men builded. And the Lord said, Behold the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do; and now nothing will be restrained from them which they have imagined to do. Go to, let us go down and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech. So [that is, by that means] the Lord scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth; and they left off building the city." This is the story, and a very foolish inconsistent story it is. In the first place, the familiar and irreverent manner in which the Almighty is spoken of in this chapter is offensive to a serious mind. As to the project of building a tower whose top should reach to heaven, there never could be a people so foolish as to have such a notion; but to represent the Almighty as jealous of the attempt, as the writer of the story has done, is adding profanation to folly. "Go to," say the builders, "let us build us a tower whose top shall reach to heaven." "Go to," says God, "let us go down and confound their language." This quaintness is indecent, and the reason given for it is worse, for, "now nothing will be restrained from them which they have imagined to do." This is representing the Almighty as jealous of their getting into heaven. The story is too ridiculous, even as a fable, to account for the diversity of languages in the world, for which it seems to have been intended.

As to the project of confounding their language for the purpose of making them separate, it is altogether inconsistent; because instead of producing this effect, it would, by increasing their difficulties, render them more necessary to each other, and cause them to keep together. Where could they go to better themselves?

Another observation upon this story is, the inconsistency of it with respect to the opinion that the bible is the Word of God given for the information of mankind; for nothing could so effectually prevent such a word from being known by mankind as confounding their language. The people, who after this spoke different languages, could no more understand such a Word generally, than the builders of Babel could understand one another. It would have been necessary, therefore, had such Word ever been given or intended to be given, that the whole earth should be, as they say it was at first, of one language and of one speech, and that it should never have been confounded.

The case, however, is, that the bible will not bear examination in any part of it, which it would do if it was the Word of God. Those who most believe it are those who know least about it, and priests always take care to keep the inconsistent and contradictory parts out of sight.

T.P.

This site has a list of all of his works: ARCHIVES

You'll notice that they have the Prospect Papers listed there, though I've found that they aren't published nearly as much as his other works. I did wind up finding the full text, if you care to read it: Prospect Papers

[up|dn]

T.P. ftw!

one of the first writers to begin my freedom from the tyranny of religion.

[Dumpy Dooby]

When I was just a little mini doobsta, I was doing research on Thomas Paine. I wrote an English paper on the history of the Declaration of Independence. I don't recall what I wrote about, but I remember I did some intense research into Paine during that time. I even ventured into *gasp!* a library! I had no clue who he was before then. Surprisingly, none of my U.S. history teachers ever mentioned him, even though he was one of the most influential Founding Fathers of America. I thought maybe it was because he was British, but Hamilton was too, and people love that asshole. So...

[up|dn]

Originally Posted by Dumpy Dooby

When I was just a little mini doobsta, I was doing research on Thomas Paine. I wrote an English paper on the history of the Declaration of Independence. I don't recall what I wrote about, but I remember I did some intense research into Paine during that time. I even ventured into *gasp!* a library! I had no clue who he was before then. Surprisingly, none of my U.S. history teachers ever mentioned him, even though he was one of the most influential Founding Fathers of America. I thought maybe it was because he was British, but Hamilton was too, and people love that asshole. So...

I tried to find a hard copy of his 'age of reason' in a few bookstores, but nobody had a clue who I was talking about. They kept thinking I was talking about some similarly named philosopher (whose name escapes me atm). Weird stuff.

[Dumpy Dooby]

Originally Posted by up|dn

I tried to find a hard copy of his 'age of reason' in a few bookstores, but nobody had a clue who I was talking about. They kept thinking I was talking about some similarly named philosopher (whose name escapes me atm). Weird stuff.

Age Of Reason is in public domain, so you should be able to get it from Project Guttenberg (sp?) and/or Wikisource. But it's weird that they wouldn't know anything about it. It's pretty famous. I guess like Big pointed out, Paine is most well known for Common Sense. There's even free audio books of that one available.

[up|dn]

Originally Posted by Dumpy Dooby

Age Of Reason is in public domain, so you should be able to get it from Project Guttenberg (sp?) and/or Wikisource. But it's weird that they wouldn't know anything about it. It's pretty famous. I guess like Big pointed out, Paine is most well known for Common Sense. There's even free audio books of that one available.

I've read Age of Reason, but I wanted a copy for myself. Heh, just now I read an essay of his against Calvinism and predestination, which was pretty good, so maybe I should have a look at Common Sense too.

(on second thought, I don't care enough about American History to read it )

[up|dn]

Back on the original topic, I've been reading some stuff from the 'dutch radicals' (Robert Price is along the same lines), and they've got some pretty interesting writings that both argue for the non-historicity of Jesus and the non-authenticity of all of Paul's letters. Even if you don't agree with their findings, and most theologians/scholars don't, they make some pretty convincing arguments.

http://www.hermann-detering.de/FabricatedJHC.pdf

Does Jesus Live, or Has He Only Lived? - van den Bergh van Eysinga

The only problem with their hypothesii (?) is that it turns all of Christian history into a Catholic conspiracy of the second century. Every other hypothesis also has problems though - especially that of trying to combine mythological stories in Palestine with well thought out theological treatises of the Epistles, and a hint of Jewish apocalypticism underlying it all.

[BigRob]

Thanks for helping UP/DOWN !

Here's my definition of an "infallable" Bible which God "inspires" men to write.

If God told these guys what to write, it should all be in agreeance with itself. There should be no errors.

Now, believers can argue that man has changed it over time, yet the Bible says a word can't be changed.

I agree it's complicated collecting the data. There's alot! There hardest part for me is to narrow it all down to get it to be a 5-7 minute speech capable of making some people wonder about the beliefs.

Looking at the results of the questionaire, I can persuade a few.

While almost everyone believes in a God (with one unsure), I also had 14 say they have a hard time trusting someone who lies to them.

8 believe the Bible infallable, 6 wavered, 4 believe it erronious

9 believed the Bible inspired, 3 wavered, 4 said it wasn't

3 believed God decieves, 3 wavered, 13 believe God totally truthful

7 believe the Bible historically accurate, 7 wavered, 5 said it wasn't

and my biggie- 9 people said it would make a difference if the Bible was inaccurate. 2 said it would make some difference, 7 would be steadfast in their belief.

Now it's a matter of picking and choosing what evidence I want to present. The presentation itself should hopefully show the error in the Bible and thus that it's fallable.

There's numerous verses in which God admits to practice lying/deceiving

1 Kings 22:23 Now, therefore, behold, the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of these thy prophets, and the Lord hath spoken evil concerning thee.
2 Chronicles 18:22 Now therefore, behold, the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of these thy prophets.
Jeremiah 4:10 Ah, Lord GOD! surely thou hast greatly deceived this people.
Jeremiah 20:7 O Lord, thou hast deceived me, and I was deceived.
Ezekiel 14:9 And if a prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the Lord have deceived that prophet.
2 Thessalonians 2:11 For this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie. So I think I win that arguement.

And I believe the historical inaccuracy is something you guys already know about so I won't quote it.

As far as it goes, I think I will show how Jesus doesn't appear anywhere else historically. Even Josephus hated Herod and would point out anything he did wrong, yet there is no mention of the "slaughter of the innocents."

I'm thinking about,as part of the God is infallabe debate, point out the mathmatical errors and afterwards say "With God anything is possible...except apparently math"

Another point I may make is that the messiah was to decend from David. Yet for that to have happened, Joseph needed to be the father. If it was truely a virgin birth, then the prophecy was unforfilled. If Joseph was the father to forfill the prophecy, then Jesus isn't the literal son of God. It can't be both ways!

Anyway, today I have a big mess of pages I printed out over the last week that I am sorting through. I have ideas in my head and just trying to sort the material in such a way that there is a coherance.

I'm still appreciative of any ideas.

[BigRob]

Update: The speech was to be given yesterday, it's main focus is the invalidity of Jesus as the Messiah, and several other students from other classes read it and said I had a good argument. The problem was once it was printed out it was eleven pages My teacher switched another student and I so I can edit down to no more than nine pages.

My thoughts, deleting the scriptures from the speech itself and instead having them as a handout to the other students and focusing my oral presentation on the lack of a historical Jesus and early Christians ripping off numerous other religions of the area/time.

Some of the reasons I may do this is to: cut the speech down, I won't have to stumble through verse XX chapter XX of Matthew (or whoever) a dozen times, and the people who pre-read it wanted copies so they can double check the verses anyway.

I'll post the finished speech sometime after tomorrow.

[Linzyhop]

Originally Posted by BigRob

Update: The speech was to be given yesterday, it's main focus is the invalidity of Jesus as the Messiah, and several other students from other classes read it and said I had a good argument. The problem was once it was printed out it was eleven pages My teacher switched another student and I so I can edit down to no more than nine pages.

My thoughts, deleting the scriptures from the speech itself and instead having them as a handout to the other students and focusing my oral presentation on the lack of a historical Jesus and early Christians ripping off numerous other religions of the area/time.

Some of the reasons I may do this is to: cut the speech down, I won't have to stumble through verse XX chapter XX of Matthew (or whoever) a dozen times, and the people who pre-read it wanted copies so they can double check the verses anyway.

I'll post the finished speech sometime after tomorrow.

good luck!