Kent Hovind Behind Bars
The Pensacola News Journal reports that Kent Hovind was led away to jail after he and his wife were found guilty of tax fraud.
U.S. District Judge Casey Rodgers released Jo Hovind until sentencing but denied Kent Hovind’s request to be released. He most likely will be detained at either Escambia County Jail or Santa Rosa County Jail until sentencing.
[Prosecuting attorney Michelle] Heldmyer said Kent Hovind was a flight risk and a “danger to the community.”
Kent Hovind? Flight risk? Say it ain’t so!… No, wait, they already did say it was so when he was arrested and the court took away his passport so he couldn’t flee the country (as it looked that he might).
Sentencing is scheduled to take place Jan. 9, so it doesn’t seem that Hovind will be having a happy Thanksgiving, Christmas, or New Year.
Oh, and by the way:
The jury also granted the prosecution’s request for the Hovinds to forfeit $430,400. That amount equals the value of the checks signed and cashed by Jo Hovind in the 44 counts.
I wonder how much of that $430,000 will come from Hovind’s bank accounts, and how much will have to come from auctioning off God’s guns and bits of pieces of CSE and Dinosaur Adventure Land.
Let’s hope Kent learns something during his time in prison.
Yeah, I know schadenfreude isn’t one of the nobler emotions, and I probably shouldn’t be enjoying Hovind’s conviction as much as I am, but hey, I’m descended from apes who survived by living in groups and had to punish individuals who obtained personal gain at the group’s expense, so I can’t help it.
Hi My name is Scott, I’m a Creationist who follows Jesus and who agrees to the Teachings of Answers In Genesis. I just want to say that yes this is sad but kent truly brought this upon himself, you break the law, you’re gonna pay for it. You do the crime you will most certainly do the time. Kent’s Love for Money over-rided his good judgement.
If he would have only obed the word of God, he would have been ok, but Kent chose to rebel againts the word of God. Here are the scriptures kent failed to heed.
– –
Romans 13:1
Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.
– –
– –
Matthew 22:16-21
…”Teacher,” they said, “we know you are a man of integrity and that you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. You aren’t swayed by men, because you pay no attention to who they are. Tell us then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not?”
But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, “You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me? Show me the coin used for paying the tax.” They brought him a denarius, and he asked them, “Whose portrait is this? And whose inscription?”
“Caesar’s,” they replied.
Then he said to them, “Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.”
– –
You see, Hovind was very anti government but what he failed to realise was that when he was breaking the law and trying to fight the government he was actually rebelling against God and breaking the law. The bible says that God is the one establishes Government and were told to submit to it. Were not told to like, love or hate the Government but we are told to submit to its authority.
Jesus also taught us to pay our taxes as seen in the scripture above.
Kent believed his home was like a church and that he didn’t get a personal income from the money he received. But that was a lie because if kent buys groceries, fills up his gas tank, buys toilet paper to wipe his butt with, guess what? kent had a personal income with the money he claims went towards his ministry.
Theres nothing wrong with getting your income from your ministry, but you simply have to pay your taxes! Just Like Jesus said to do!
The church is tax exempt because the money goes to missionary work.. on but anybody who gets a personal income from the donations they receive, must pay taxes.
My pastor gets a personal income with the church donations and thats biblical but he also pys taxes which is also biblical
Kent just failed to heed to the bible, maybe he misinterpreted it, but even so, sadly he is now paying the price.
In Christ, scott 🙂
To the guy who is rejoicing in Hovind’s conviction – don’t insult the apes by claiming to be their descendent! But you can count on the fact that you will reap what you sow.
It is evident that Hovard is utterly wrong in claiming that there is such a thing as Creation Science. The fact is that the scientific commmunity has proved evolution over and over again.
Nevertheless, it is far worse than having a wrong opinion to toss a man in prison for his views. It is atrocious that Hovard is jailed because the IRS doesn’t like his beliefs.
Gerhard:
The belief for which Hovind (note spelling) is currently in jail is the belief that he doesn’t need to pay taxes if he doesn’t want to, and that it’s okay to do things specifically to avoid being noticed doing something illegal by the IRS. This has nothing to do with him being a creationist.
Having met Kent Hovind on more than one occasion, and having read and seen pages and pages, and heard and seen hours and hours of his material – having seen his home, which really, has been converted into this Dinosaur Adventure Land – right off his back porch in fact — I don’t see malice, fraud, or any attempt at anything beyond following his convictions regarding natural property and speech rights, and what he understands to be an illegal tax system. He is a decent individual, and went out of his way to explain things to children, and to make paper airplanes with them, and to help them learn to think – not simply to regurgitate what they had been taught.
He has contributed immeasurably to society in his biblical teachings regarding views of the natural environment, the government — and most especially, the value of the person — literally spending every waking moment thinking or acting in a way to encourage compassion, and right thinking.
I’ve written him many times about some of the things he has said which make perfect sense, but are unverified, and therefore risky, such as his pet theory that bombings are the direct result of government or other conspiracies. He has made many enemies, some of whom are capable of great evil to counter him. He has been attacked viciously for years.
In America, “We the People” are Caesar, the sovereign authority in the land. The Constitution is our formal expression of law – the highest in the land. We have set that aside over time, in many ways. Ostensibly under that system, or outside of it, we starved Terri Schiavo to death by a court order – wherein giving to her a glass of water became a violation of the law for the thirteen days until she died of dehydration and starvation.
Legality is not the highest measure of right.
I pay my taxes as voluntary “contributions,” like the form says. I admire Kent Hovind for following his convictions. I do not think he is a flight risk. I believe he knew what he was doing, and the risks. I look forward to seeing what he can accomplish in prison with his fellow inmates. I expect he will gain their respect early and make a huge difference in many of their lives. He will suffer tremendously, of course – but I suspect he is OK with that, too. From what I know of him, his best game is in front of him.
Praise God for his ministry, and the truth of God’s divine creation – done, I believe, exactly as Scripture describes it. That truth depends on no man to validate it, and if every creationist were discredited and jailed, it would still be true. Moreover, it lifts men up to know that God is watching, has dominion, and is our creator – as opposed to the materialistic naturalistic philosophy which seems to conclude that life is all about how much money you make, how much stuff you own, or how much pleasure you enjoy…
Jeff White
Jeff White:
As I recall, his view of the value of the person is that we’re all sinners who deserve to burn forever for being the way God made us (though he blames it on a pair of naïve people 6000 years ago), and that there’s nothing we can do about it except get down on our knees and beg the invisible sky daddy not to roast us.
On the environment, he has said that all six billion people on Earth can be packed into the area around Pensacola, FL, and that therefore the Earth is not overcrowded. Of course, he never mentions what these people will breathe, drink, eat, how they’ll dispose of their waste or, for that matter, how they’ll sleep or move, since IIRC he has them packed in with a square foot per person.
How about the things he keeps saying, but have conclusively been disproved? Like Noah’s flood? Or that vitamin B17 cures cancer?
Do you have any actual evidence to back up this assertion, or do you just believe in creationism simply because you don’t want the Bible to be wrong?
In particular, how do you explain the various nested hierarchies found in living beings? If, like even YECs, you accept “microevolution”, then what stops microevolution from adding up into macroevolution? And if you think that the Earth is young (on the order of thousands, not billions of years old), then how do you explain the fact that all of the commonly-used dating methods agree with each other? (I suspect that you think that they’re wrong; I’m not asking for an explanation of why they’re wrong, but rather why they all give similar results.)
You’re confusing the common meaning of “materialism” (someone who cares only about possessions and pleasure) with the philosophical meaning: someone who thinks that only ordinary matter matters. When your car makes a rattling noise, and you check the undercarriage to see if anything’s loose, you’re using materialism. If you weren’t, you’d check for ghosts and evil spirits. But you don’t do that, do you?
where exactly does it say that individual income is taxable? no one can answer that. google.com video, ‘from freedom to facism’ very interesting. you are the same people who believe only what you’ve been told, such as the lie that there is a separation between church and state. that’s not in the Constitution. check it out.
What’s the current status of Dr Dino? Wasn’t he supposed to be sentenced on Jan 9th?
I thought so at first as well, but apparently it’s been rescheduled for Jan. 19 (or maybe the paper had a typo, or something).
( Encouragement for Kent Hovind)
Mtt 18:21 Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times? 22Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven.
(To all that speak contrary to the bible, and say it is the truth)
John 9:41 Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth.
(To all that speak contrary to the bible, and say it is the truth)
John 15:22 If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no cloak for their sin.
(To all that promote lies in the text books)
1 Cor 8:12 But when ye sin so against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, ye sin against Christ.
(Come to your senses all that have not the knowledge of God)
1 Cor 15:34 Awake to righteousness, and sin not; for some have not the knowledge of God: I speak this to your shame.
(To all that speak publicly against the word of God, You will be publicly rebuked)
1 Tim 5:20 Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear.
(To all that intentionally speak against the Word of God, God promises Judgment)
Heb 10:26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, 27But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries. 28He that despised Moses? law died without mercy under two or three witnesses: 29Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace? 30For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.
(To all that blame God)
James 1:13 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither temteth he any man:
(Every man is tempted of his own sinful nature)
James 1:14 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.James 1:13 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither temteth he any man:
(All lusts lead to sin and sin leads to death)
James 1:15 Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death. 16Do not err, my beloved brethren. 17Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.
(For everyone who knows the truth and does contrary)
James 4:17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.
( Satan is the father of all sin. all Sin is of the devil)
1 John 3:8 He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning.
(It is sin not to believe in Jesus Christ/ The Word of God. All sin = Death)
Jn 8:21 Then said Jesus again unto them, I go my way, and ye shall seek me, and shall die in your sins: whither I go, ye cannot come. 22Then said the Jews, Will he kill himself? because he saith, Whither I go, ye cannot come. 23And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world. 24I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.
(To all that inwardly know what is truth but take the other road)
Mtt 23:27 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men?s bones, and of all uncleanness. 28Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.
( To All: God = love therefore love God)
John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
D:
Have you ever watched or listened to Hovind’s seminar? He can get up to 490 lies in one session.
And why did you copy and paste all of those Bible snippets, as if they demonstrated anything? Have you no thoughts of your own?
Gerhard Falk Says:
December 7th, 2006 at 6:14 pm
“It is evident that Hovard is utterly wrong in claiming that there is such a thing as Creation Science. The fact is that the scientific commmunity has proved evolution over and over again.”
Just as noone can prove there is a God, noone can prove there isnt a God. How does evolution disprove a God? Maybe you should check out your philosophy; even Darwin – the founder of evolution – still saw no reason not to beleive God could create the world in this way.
some people, so narrow minded.
It is evident that George can not spell, or provide a convincing point of view. Do some real research, and get back to us. Oh ya, stop quoting a racist!
I am so sad to stumble onto this blog when searching for information on paying taxes. I’ve never heard of this man or of his claims, but I was intrigued and hurt by how much hate and fear I read into all this commentary. For those who do not believe in God and Jesus, I am sorry for Christians who have hurt you and made you feel condemned. Please forgive us, for we don’t know all the answers and some of us can’t spell very well, and we screw up just like everyone else. For those Christians posting here, remember the teachings of Jesus that He didn’t condemn the world, but gave his life for everyone so that they might live. If we aren’t giving that same love and grace, what good is it to try to convince people that God created the world? I’m just a sinner in this life trying to make it and I need Jesus to get me through. Whoever you are, wherever you are, however cynically you want to respond to me….Jesus doesn’t care what you believe about Creation. He wants you to know how much He loves you.
Britt:
So why doesn’t he send me flowers?
Seriously, though: if he’s all-knowing, then he knows exactly what it would take to convince me that he exists and loves me. And if he’s all-powerful, then he can do something that’ll convince me. But he hasn’t. Every time I ask for evidence, I get arguments from incredulity and excuses why there’s no evidence.
So Jesus is either a) unwilling or b) unable to show himself to me, or c) doesn’t know how to do it. Or perhaps d) he doesn’t exist. Which is it?
Haven’t you ever seen flowers in the wild? They are for you, arensb. ; )
I’m sorry that my reply does fall into one or more of these categories. I respect your intelligent approach to this question. Not everyone (myself included, most likely) has the intelligence that you have. Are we to be excluded from knowing God because we can’t intellectualy figure God out? Do you love anyone? Maybe you have children or a lover? Can you intellectually describe your love for them and why you sacrifice things for their comfort?
Do you know that the Big Bang happened? What existed before the explosion? How did that matter come to be? I’m not challenging your theory, I’m just asking if you have “faith” in some components of it for which there is missing evidence. If you have faith in some missing pieces of scientific theories, why can’t you have faith that there is a God?
Couldn’t the fact that I am telling you that Jesus loves you and that I am praying for you even though I don’t really know you be some kind of evidence that God loves you? This is the first time I have ever blogged, and I wasn’t even trying to end up on this site, so couldn’t you consider that some divine intervention is involved?
Can you force someone to love you? God gave us free choice in believing in Him or not. He wants us to choose to love Him. Would we have a choice if there was unquestionable evidence that He existed? (You’ve probably heard this one before, right?)
let me propose that it is e) You are not yet ready to see the evidence with your heart
I don’t have all the answers, by any means! I even doubt the logic of some of the questions I just asked. All I can say for myself is that I have decided to believe in God, Jesus, and the Bible and I enjoy living this way. I have nothing to lose by having faith. I’m trying to learn about the character of God by reading the Bible and through people that He has created. Even you show me the evidence of God by your very ability to question it! I have a hard time with the whole modern day church scene. It’s hard to be authentic when you are surrounded by people in one place who are dressed up like their going to an interview, carefully speaking “Christianese” to each other. That was a big hinderance to my faith in the beginning, until I learned that that’s not how Jesus was. He hung out with people of “questionable” status (like me) and defended them from the ‘churchy’ people who judged them.
Sorry–few words good.
Britt:
Of course not. I can’t figure out the stock market or nuclear reactors. Heck, I don’t even know how glue works, but I know those things exist. The same is not true of any gods, however.
Why can’t you have faith in Zeus, or Odin, or leprechauns, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster?
This is a serious question. If I am to believe one thing without evidence, what is there to stop me from believing any number of things without evidence?
If you could add that to a big pile of other evidence, it could. However, it’s much more likely that you think that Jesus exists and loves me. But how do you know that what you believe is true? If you were wrong, how would you know? (And perhaps more importantly to me, how can I know whether you’re right or wrong?)
According to the story, Satan had not just belief in God, but first-hand ironclad proof of God. He knew God the same way that I know my family, friends, and coworkers. And yet Satan didn’t choose to love God. So it seems that the answer to your question is yes, we would have a choice.
Snarky answer #1: I can’t see with my heart: it has no light-sensitive cells or optic nerves. And even if it did, it’s pretty dark inside my chest.
Answer #2: What you’re really saying is “don’t think. Just believe.” And again, I’ll refer you to my earlier answer: if I’m supposed to believe in one god because it feels good, then why not two, or ten, or a thousand? Why not believe that I have a diamond the size of a grand piano buried in my back yard (that would certainly make me feel good)? Why not believe that I’m immortal and can eat all the bacon cheeseburgers I want without worrying about having a heart attack?
You did? Can you believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster for a few minutes and show me how it’s done?
Just so you know, he’s not a very pleasant character. The OT god is a murderous lunatic. And as for the NT god, well, anyone who thinks that infinite punishment for a finite crime is a good thing is morally bankrupt.
arensb,
You do sound kind of “snarky”, but I can’t help but like you anyway, dammit! I think we both know that nothing I say will make you believe in God, and nothing you say will make me not believe in God. I was looking over some other discussions you’ve had on this blogsite. I’m curious why you are so willing to debate the existance of God. Does it offend you that I believe in God? Does that hurt you in any way? If someone were to give you proof of God, would that be enough for you to love God? (You’re right–Satan is a good example of someone who believed in God, but didn’t love Him. I concede to your point.) Do you wish that you could convince me that there is no God? Are you trying to save me from something?
I do believe in this God and Jesus because it feels good. The flying Spaghetti Monster has it’s appeal, but I’m trying to eat fewer carbs. In your world, I would be a loser. I’m guessing you value people based on intellect and various other factors. (Just a guess! I don’t know that.) I’m definitely not going to go with the Koran, because as a woman, I would again be a loser. Buddhism–I can’t sit still long enough to achieve enlightenment. What I love about the story of Jesus is that I don’t have to aspire to or achieve anything. I don’t have to follow the rules to win. I just have to accept my own mistakes, ask for forgiveness, and live this one commandedment that covers all the others–Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, and mind, and love your fellow humans as yourself. Even that one commandment is too hard for me, so the real free set of Ginsu knives here is that He helps me do that. He brings everyone to the same level–forgiven and loved. From there people chose from 2 camps. 1)won’t accept and/or believe the love and forgiveness of God/Jesus 2) will believe and accept the love and forgiveness of God/Jesus.
So, supposing that there isn’t a God after all, if I’m living the commandment of loving God and you, am I hurting you and/or society? (And I apologize for all the people who call themselves Christians who forget about this commandment) My point is that if I’m wrong and there is no God, I don’t lose much. Maybe respect at most. However, if you’re wrong and there is a God, you’re missing out on taking the gift of eternal life in heaven plus the benefits while still living of having God’s help in loving others (even people who hate you), which is surprisingly fulfilling.
Have you actually read all or most of the NT? I agree that the Jesus of the New Testiment doesn’t make sense. Why were we all condemned to hell–all placed on equal ground, and then all equally completely pardoned by the death of Jesus? Again, it comes back to 2 different camps of people equally guilty, equally forgiven–the difference being the believing and accepting.
Thank you for your questions and comments. I’m almost certain to lose any debate with you, but I hope you at least can see a little of the true character of Jesus through what I’m saying. He loves you as you are just as He loves me as I am. Because I am overwhelmed by this love, I want to be a better person, I want to be able to love other people better. It’s changed my whole outlook on life. I can’t earn forgiveness that I’ve already been given. I’m free to make every life improvement an expression of thankfulness to God. When I screw up, I ask forgiveness, and I’m forgiven. I still have to face the consequences of my actions, but I don’t fear any punishment from God because I was pardoned for eternity and I accept that.
As for the OT, I have many questions about that myself. I’ve not read all of the OT, yet, actually.
I’m not asking you not to think. I’m just saying that you won’t be able to figure it out completely by mere thinking. “We have no more ability to figure out God than a paper airplane that we create has the ability to figure us out.” paraphrased quote from Max Lacado.
Belief in itself doesn’t hurt me. In the words of Thomas Jefferson, “it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket, nor breaks my leg.” You’re free to believe anything you like, as long as it doesn’t hurt me.
Where it matters is when people act upon their beliefs: as Sam Harris is fond of pointing out, the simplest way to understand 9/11 is to posit that, as incredible as it may seem, those people actually thought that flying a plane into a skyscraper, killing thousands of people, and dying in the process, was a good thing that would make God happy, and grant them eternal bliss.
Less-extreme examples abound: there are millions of people in the US today who, for religious reasons, would like to deny every woman the right to have an abortion; deny girls life-saving HPV vaccine; deny gays the right to marry; prevent medical researchers from using embryonic stem cells; undermine science education by removing evolution from school curricula. The list goes on and on.
In short, what bothers me is not your beliefs, but what you do because of those beliefs.
Well, no: what if the god in question turned out to be Quetzalcoatl, or Cthulhu, or Q from Star Trek? Or what if it turned out that Jehovah and Jesus don’t exist but Satan does, and that he wrote the Bible and deliberately cast himself as the bad guy just to mess with our heads?
I think that the truth is desirable in and of itself, that it’s better to believe things that are true, and not believe things that aren’t. As far as I can tell, your belief in God is mistaken. I’d prefer that people not hold mistaken beliefs.
(And that goes both ways, by the way. If it turns out that there is a god or gods, I want to know that, so I can adjust accordingly.)
Note that you haven’t said a single word about whether your belief is objectively true or not. You’re not arguing that God exists, you’re arguing that belief in God is useful, which is an entirely separate matter.
Ah, Pascal’s wager. I suppose it was bound to pop up sooner or later.
Of course, it’s not really a choice between Jesus and nothing: perhaps Allah is the one true god, and he’ll send you to hell for following Jesus. Or perhaps Satan wrote the Bible just to mess with us, and he’ll send you to hell for falling for it.
If you find the argument above convincing, then what you really ought to do is find the religion that has the worst hell and/or the best heaven, and follow that: if you become a fundamentalist Baptist and it turns out that you’re right, then you get to go to heaven. But if it turns out that the Hindus got it right, then you may have to suffer through a few thousand more lifetimes before you get it right, but at least you’ve avoided the fiery pit, right?
I confess that I haven’t. I keep trying, and always get distracted by shiny things.
Are you saying that Jesus as described in the Bible isn’t the true Jesus? That you pick and choose which parts of the Bible you believe? (Which everyone does, even the so-called literalists.) If you do, that’s fine (after all, it’s probably best if you don’t believe that you can drink poison with no ill effect), it’s just a matter of being honest with yourself, even if no one else.
Good on ya. I’m glad that you’re happy and want to improve yourself. But once again, you’re not arguing that your beliefs are true; you’re arguing that they’re useful.
Whereas when I screw up, I have to make amends to the people I’ve wronged, and take steps to ensure that I don’t do it again. (As a friend of mine likes to say, “It sucks being an atheist. You can’t blame the Devil for your screwups.”)
You’re committing the “any amount of uncertainty implies great big gobs of uncertainty” fallacy. There’s a big difference between “we can’t know everything about God” and “we can never know anything about God”. I’m cool with partial knowledge, subject to later revision as we learn more.
And at any rate, just because we can imagine something complex and wonderful beyond our comprehension doesn’t mean that it exists. That’s just the old ontological argument.
I’m glad you’re understanding my point. I’m not arguing that God exists! Just as I find it useful to believe the Bible, you find it useful to believe that in the beginning there was nothing at all, then suddenly there was something that exploded or imploded from nothing.
“Are you saying that Jesus as described in the Bible isn’t the true Jesus? That you pick and choose which parts of the Bible you believe? (Which everyone does, even the so-called literalists.)”
I’m saying the Jesus you see many Christians portraying isn’t the Jesus of the Bible, actually. It was egotistical of me to imply that I am perfectly reflecting the Jesus of the Bible. Sorry about that. If you actually read about Jesus in the Bible you would get the satisfaction of telling the right-wing “Christians” that Jesus certainly wants young ladies to be vaccinated from HPV based on His character of mercy and healing. I can’t justify the actions of everyone who calls themselves a Christian. I can tell you that I think you would like Jesus (even viewing Him as a fictional literary character.) I’m not picking and choosing what to believe in the Bible so much as I’m picking and choosing who I want to be identified with. Although, I still don’t quite see how the OT and NT work together. Like I said, I haven’t read the whole thing yet.
“Whereas when I screw up, I have to make amends to the people I’ve wronged, and take steps to ensure that I don’t do it again. (As a friend of mine likes to say, “It sucks being an atheist. You can’t blame the Devil for your screwups.”)”
I have to do the same thing, of course! I never blame my mistakes on the devil. (Just because something was on SNL’s Church Chat doesn’t mean it’s in the Bible.) I have a choice, and I sometimes make bad decisions that hurt other people. I take responsibility for my actions. What I mean by being pardoned is that I don’t fear hell-fire every time I screw up.
I’m happy to continue this conversation, but I can’t prove God (in any way that would satisfy you) and you can’t disprove God, so do you want to agree to disagree at this point?
Britt:
When I said “useful belief”, above, I meant something that you should believe even if it’s not true. For example, most parents probably think that their children are better than they really are, objectively speaking. This is good because it helps them give children the attention and nurture they should get. So “my child is the best kid in the whole world” is a useful delusion.
The Big Bang isn’t one of these. As far as I can tell, it’s not a delusion. It’s the best available description of the beginning of the universe. If you have a better one that matches all observations to date, then please present it. If I’m wrong, I’d like to know.
Likewise, as far as I can tell, there are no gods, so belief in a god is a delusion. But it’s not even a useful delusion, since there’s nothing that religion provides that you can’t get without religion as well.
Dear dear Snarky……
I can speak for my own experience that believing in God provides me with hope that I would not have without belief in God.
Britt:
Do you mean hope for an eternity of bliss in the afterlife? If so, then is it really a good idea to hope for things that can never be?
For example, and without wishing to impugn your talents, why don’t you believe yourself to be a world-class writer? That way you could hope to win a Nobel Prize in literature. Why don’t you believe you have superpowers like Superman? That way, you could hope to bring all sorts of good to the world.
If “God exists” is in the same category of beliefs as “I can write better than Shakespeare” and “I can fly”, would you want to know it? Or would you prefer to persist in believing it?
I am sorry for whatever happened to you to make you so cynical. I don’t mean that in a condescending, pitying way. I mean I am really sorry.
Britt,
Why does there have to have been some life event to have made arensb cynical? Even if there was, were you responsible? If not, your exclamation of sorrow is difficult to perceive as being other than an expression of your own feeling of superiority, as if your life and existence are somehow “better” than arensb’s because of your belief. That’s rather arrogant.
Kevin Smith has a wonderful quote in “Dogma”:
Britt:
My examples may have been ill-chosen, but my comment wasn’t mean cynically. I generally try to be an optimist, descending into cynicism only when it’s warranted (though boy, has it been warranted lately, if you follow politics at all).
But the questions at the core of my comment are:
Do you think it is desirable to believe things that aren’t true? (Yes/no/sometimes/rarely/depends/etc.)
To the extent that you think that it’s undesirable to believe things that aren’t true, shouldn’t you examine your beliefs and get rid of the ones that aren’t true, i.e., don’t correspond to reality?
To the extent that you think that it’s desirable to believe things that aren’t necessarily true, but that make you happy, why don’t you believe other things in the same category? Why don’t you believe that you have a diamond the size of a grand piano buried in your back yard? Why not believe that Santa Claus brings presents? Why not believe that you can talk with animals like Dr. Doolittle and fly like Peter Pan? Why does God go in the “things it would be good to believe even if it weren’t true” category, and not all these other things?
Why do YOU think I might believe in God and not those other things?
Britt:
Instead of dealing with potential misconceptions on my part, why not just answer the question?
Okay, you evoltionists, how come no one proved him wrong and got the 250,000 …
thats what i thought……..
Bart:
Because the “challenge” is as crooked as a bundle of nucleosomes.
arensb:
I’m sorry. I just thought maybe you were leading to a different answer than I already gave you after you asked why I didn’t believe in the Flying spaghetti monster and so forth. It’s not just that it makes ME happy, it’s that it makes other people around me happier, too, because I am compelled to be more forgiving since I have been forgiven. Of course, I still have to ask others for forgiveness for the many times I mess up. It’s a daily battle for me to try to see people as Jesus sees them. He sees everyone as someone that he died to save. I tend to see people as mean-spirited or arrogant or bad drivers or innocent or friendly or handsome or the kind of people who might watch Jerry Springer or actually enjoy all the press that Anna Nicole Smith is getting.
I don’t like this kind of discourse, because I’m not good at debating, yet I’m willing to look like a fool just so you can have answers to your questions that you may or may not be asking for your own benefit. It’s pretty humbling for me. Can your line of questioning make me look like a fool? Yes, I am a fool in many things. Can you show that my character is flawed? I will tell you now that it is! I am searching for Truth, too. But, I believe that I have found Truth, and that Truth is a who and not a what. If you really want to understand the anwers to the questions that you have asked me, you should read the New Testament. Shiny things can be a distraction, I know. There are some versions in more modern-day English that might be helpful to try–such as The Message and the Living Bible. I’ve also heard that the Ragamuffin Gospel is good (I didn’t make it up.).
There is value in searching for even more truth. But for me, there is greater value in showing love to the hurting. That is where I want to put my energy.
Also, I’m sorry that I called you cynical. I don’t have the right to judge you or assume anything about your past. Fez was right about that. I hope that was not hurtful to you. Even if my assumption were true, I was out of line to say that.
I wish you peace on your journey for truth. You have a beautiful mind. Jesus love you.
I respectfully bow out.
Britt
I find it very intresting how as soon as something bad happends too him (plenty of bad things happen too good people) that people come out of the wood work too manipulate his image more then ever, just because he is not a pro evolution believer does that mean you have too ruthlessly cut him down? is that how pro evolutionists act? because i have not as of yet heard anything nice said by a pro-evolutionist yet, so im starting too see evolutionists as negative name callin bashers but that would not be right so i dismiss that kind of thinking, in fact kent hovind has never said he hated any of the evolutionests in the least but many have said they hated him and worse and it was what was being tought and believed that he had a problem with, i have heard many of his speaches and i have heard alot (many times more) pro evolution speaches and costly documentary’s and what makes the most scientific sense is indeed what kent says weather you believe in god or not, science is science not a popular bashing arena and i would think that someone using there judgement in this mannor too attack someone without a just reason or even a just reason and manipulate there image would have something incorrect or wrong with there judgement and how they conduct themselfs and if this being so then how much is there judgement gonna convice someone like me or someone else that how they see things and judge things in science as true and/or flawless? could this part of there judgement me inpaired also? think for a minute, if kents hovinds theory’s are scientific, then they are automaticly worth looking at and accepting to do other wise would be in fact not scientific and in fact a magor flaw and would also be called bad judgement, is it just intresting or do i make a worthy point?
And yes i have heard kent hovind talk how evolution was proven wrong a long time ago and even other scientists agree with him, i wonder if they had this problem with provening the world was round and not flat, well until this bad evolutionary theory is publicly accept as incorrect as science “has proven”, i state the world is flat, why not if proof means nothing right?
Now i have talked with like minded and not like minded people when it comes too kent hovind and theres nothing spacy about him or weird, he’s a nice guy straight up, level headed and very intelligent. Now with his reactions from what all i read about is common shock but i am surprise too see what seems too be desperation too ruin his character and i would know i read alot what was said about him and quoted i would think mostly out of context as well as things he said manipulated like him saying “he’s like job or jesus” (trying too quot him) but did anyone ask what he ment? no, in fact i don’t recall much of his side of everything yet either! the law like science has both sides or should about any disagrement and when only one side is shown there is a flaw in judgement or injustice no one can say other wise and for the public too judge anything about this man when only hearing people bash is indeed unjust. one more thought… without knowledge there is no power and without power nothing can be said, so whats being hidden? thoughs who are corrupt hide truth because truth exposes them, so in the end in all comes down too truth.
Personaly i don’t know all the facts as it does seem one sided and its not generaly easy too get his side of this all from what i have found except small phrases and other people stating what he ment but one things for sure, very few people were there too witness all of this and i personaly am not saying anything i don’t know for sure about until i get the answers from both sides, im not one too judge someone so quickly, the media is renowned too make anyone look like a villain too sell what they have thats no secret.
take care all and ty for your time.
jonathan:
Why do you insist on making my point?
Wanna try that again, but using punctuation this time? (And perhaps a dash of capitalization and a pinch of spelling.) I really can’t be bothered to wade through all that to try to figure out what you were trying to say.
Better call the authorities and warn the villiagers – I think the dam on somebody’s stream of consciousness has been breached.
arensb,
I’m still curious that you think you have apparently “done the research” on Jesus and God and scientific fact. You seem to seek truth, but blindly. God’s Word says seek me and you will find me if you seek me with all of your heart. If you don’t have the will or desire to do so, don’t blame God.
You said earlier that you don’t get a God who would make you like you are and condemn you to Hell for being what He made you. If you ever actually took the time to read the Bible, you would understand that Adam’s sin corrupted the nature of all men from the first sin on. Likewise, you would understand that God is holy. So holy that His creation’s sin separated Him from them. You would understand that God is so holy that he hated sin…so much so that He condemned the sinners to eternal death.
Of course, you would also know that God, being a God of judgement, was also a God of ultimate love. You would know and understand that His love was so great that He was willing to become “one of us” and die a death that none of us could. You would comprehend that He paid His own judgement of sin…death…so that we didn’t have to. Then offered eternal life to us despite OUR CHOICE to disobey His loving rules.
You may be able to justify your atheism because of clever lies about God’s existence, creation, evolution, or your own limited feelings or reason. You may be able to point to numerous people who have failed to live up to your expectations of what a true christian would be like. Like God’s word points out, “All have sinned and fall short…”
However, you start looking pretty desparate to remain an atheist at all cost when you ignore the man of Jesus Christ. Surely you don’t argue that He existed. Surely you are aware of the incredible amount of historical evidence from both believers and nonbelievers. Surely you are aware of the hundreds of people that saw Him before and after His death and RESURRECTION…hundreds of eye-witnesses. You see, there was a reason that many who actually knew Him died horrible deaths rather than deny Him. Because they actually knew the truth. They didn’t have to believe by faith alone. They were actually there!
But, “no matter,” you say. God didn’t do enough to prove Himself to me, so it’s on Him. Let me know how that works out for you on Judgment Day. “You died the most horrible death possible so I wouldn’t have to, but I didn’t actually take any of the time you gave me to even read about it.” Yeah, try that.
Or, do the research (read the Bible for yourself) and then make a decision. Will you know or understand all of your questions? Not likely. But you will know enough to make an honest decision. You may not choose to follow God, but don’t say He didn’t give you enough information to know the truth. That would be the biggest lie you could make to yourself.
I may have been a cynical, logical, self justifying, selfish person. But even I couldn’t deny the Truth. The more I seek, the more I find. Don’t get me wrong. Faith is a necessary part of believing in God. His own Word says, “Without faith, it is impossibe to please God.” But, God didn’t expect us to believe on faith alone…that is why He sent Jesus.
Happy Easter!
jp:
Actually, no, I’m not aware that there’s much extrabiblical evidence at all for the existence of Jesus, let alone resurrection. Can you point me at it?
Sure thing. The writings of Josephus are a good place to start. If you are really willing to take the time, check out “The Case for Christ” from your local library. If your not a big reader, it is available on audio CD as well. I found the CD easier to follow than the book…less likely for those shiny things to distract you.
You would be doing yourself a disservice to throw out the Bible as evidence, however. The more you actually research, the greater its accuracy becomes.
But, you will find that out for yourself…if you make the effort. If you are interested at all in science, you might check out “The Case for a Creator”.
It is a more difficult read (or listen) than The Case for Christ, but as an atheist, I bet you will still find if fascinating.
jp:
Care to narrow it down a bit? According to Wikipedia, Flavius Josephus wrote half a dozen books. Were you thinking of one in particular?
Specifically, were you thinking of the 4th-century insertion in Josephus’s Antiquities of the Jews that mentions Jesus?
Judging by the reviews I’ve read so far, The Case for Christ is a book of standard apologetics (e.g., how to get around the problem of evil). I haven’t seen anyone mention any specific evidence for the existence of a god. But perhaps I haven’t read the right reviews, or have missed the relevant passages. Can you summarize the evidence that Strobel provides?
I’m not throwing out the Bible altogether. But surely you agree that it’s foolish to believe something just because it says so in some book. That’s why I asked for extrabiblical evidence: what external, independent confirmation is there that Jesus lived, that he performed miracles, or that he was resurrected?
Earlier, you wrote:
So far you’ve mentioned one 1st century historian, probably alluding to a later forgery. Even so, Flavius Josephus could not have been a witness to any of Jesus’ miracles or resurrection, since he was born after Jesus is said to have died. And surely Lee Strobel’s book of apologetics can’t count as “hundreds of eye-witnesses”. So who are they? And isn’t there any physical evidence (rather that eyewitness testimony)?
arensb:
Concerning Josephus, I believe “Antiquities” is where the reference is found. Tacitus is another non-biblical reference (15:44). Lucian of Samasota was another (The Death of Peregrine, 11-13). Suetonius mentions Christians less than 100 years after the crucifixion of Jesus (Claudius, 25). The Talmud is also a reference (The Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, 43a.) You might also look up The Nazareth decree.
You said you are not throwing out the Bible altogether. When you test the Bible as you would to verify any other book of history, you will find it is accurate. Luke and Acts provide an abundance of evidence, as once critic Sir Willam Ramsay discovered (St Paul the Traveler and the Roman Citizen, p.8).
The fact that the majority of the New Testament was written within a few short years of Christ’s death and resurrection would have been easily proven false when it was written because many readers of the letters to the Churches were still alive when Jesus was around. Paul himself was probably Jesus greatest critics…until he met him. I am confident that you will find more than enough evidence if you look.
The review you read about “The Case for Christ” doesn’t tell you what the book actually says (it is not a book of standard apologetics-it was written by an atheist like yourself who actually took the time to check the facts out for himself).
If you have time to blog with me, surely you can find time to actually read the New Testament for yourself. If the “thees” and “thous” are too much for you, try The Message. It is a paraphrase that reads more like today’s language.
I have not accepted Jesus blindly. I put Him, the Bible, history, logic, science…evidence…to the test. Quite frankly, I am shocked when anyone else doesn’t come to the same conclusion I did. It leaves me wondering if they actually tried to find the truth, or just accepted the “thoughts,” “probablies,” or “beliefs” of someone else (or even themselves).
When you do the research and find the “evidence” points to a historical Jesus, Bible, and God, then what? Do you ignore it? Do you weight lesser arguments against to avoid it? Or do you finally get to the point where you either choose to accept or deny what you have found to be true? That is your call…for you. I made the call for me. I simply couldn’t explain away the facts, and am quite happy with the choice I made.
I hope you find that you are as well.
jp:
Then presumably you also know that that passage is very likely a later insertion, probably added during the 4th century.
Do you mean this passage? If so, as far as I can tell, all he says is that a) there are Christians, and b) they got their name from Christus, who was executed. You’ll notice that he doesn’t claim to be an eyewitness. Nor does he mention any miracles (including the resurrection).
This text? Yes, it mentions Christians, but according to the introduction, The Death of Peregrine was written after 169 CE, and the existence of Christians in the 2nd century is not in dispute. (Not to mention the fact that Lucian’s is quite obviously not an eyewitness account.)
As I said, the existence of Christians in the 2nd century is not in dispute. The question is not whether the religion exist, or whethere there are people who believe the stories told about Jesus; the question is whether they actually happened.
For instance, ask yourself what it would take to convince you that Xenu the evil alien overlord really existed, came to Earth in spacefaring DC-8s, and killed upmteen billion Thetans by dropping nuclear bombs into volcanoes. I could point you at any number of Scientologists who believe that it happened, but you would presumably object that just because they believe it doesn’t mean that it’s true. Presumably you’d want independent verification (and probably quite a lot of it, since the claim is so extraordinary).
Christians make claims no less fantastic than the Scientologists do, such as that a virgin woman gave birth to a child, and a boy at that. It just doesn’t seem that way because the Christian claims are much more familiar.
Well, let’s look at a concrete argument: Matthew 27:51-53 says that when Jesus died, there was an earthquake, that many people were brought back to life, and that they went into town and visited people.
I think it’s pretty obvious that this didn’t happen. Not only did none of the other three evangelists make any mention of this, neither did anyone else, in or out of the Bible. And yet you’d think that something like that, people would notice. The Romans can be forgiven for not thinking too much of the execution of some rabble-rousing rabbi, but you’d think they’d notice an earthquake followed by living dead people walking around town.
It’s far more likely that whoever wrote the book of Matthew got his sources mixed up and mixed this legend in with what Matthew had told him. Or perhaps a later scribe put it in by mistake. Or some editor inserted it because it’s the sort of thing that should have happened.
But perhaps I’m wrong. A good geologist should be able to find evidence that there was an earthquake in Jerusalem around 33 CE. I’m not sure how one would show that dead people actually came back to life, but reality isn’t limited by my imagination. If there is evidence for these resurrections, please show me.
What evidence is this? In the copy that I found here, page 8 is the last paragraph of the preface to the 3d edition. Can you look up the bit you’re talking about and tell me which one it is?
I think you mean “a few decades”. As far as I know, Mark, the earliest of the four canonical gospels, was written no earlier than 70 CE.
Many of the people who saw Elvis Presley dead are still alive. And yet there are already lots of people who think he never died.
And how do you know this? Because it says so in the Bible? You realize that saying, “The Bible is true because the Bible says so” is circular reasoning, right?
I’ve tried, off and on, but unfortunately real life keeps interfering. I hate to tell you this, but the Bible just isn’t that compelling.
Also, in case you care, I usually use the NIV, simply because I have both paper and online copies, as well as a KJV that I sometimes compare it to. I also have the Oxford Study Bible, which includes the NRSV.
If I find that the evidence indicates that there really is a god, that Jesus is his son, and that the Bible is at least a rough approximation to the truth, then of course I’ll change my mind. Why wouldn’t I? If Elvis were to be interviewed on Larry King, and a DNA test showed that he was almost certainly Priscilla’s father, wouldn’t you maybe change your mind about Elvis being dead?
I’m quite willing to change my mind in the face of the evidence. But since you’re making quite extraordinary claims, it would take a lot of good, solid evidence to convince me, and unfortunately, you’ve barely started. So far, you’ve made a case (mostly through the Tacitus passage) that it’s plausible that there was a preacher in Judea called “Christus” by his followers, who was executed by the Romans. Now you just need to show that he really did perform miracles, really rose from the dead, and really is the son of a god.
arensb:
I just spent an hour responding to a number of your questions…and just lost it all!
Since I need to get some sleep, I will be brief. Rather than rewrite everything, I will start where I was ending.
You are obviously interested in knowing the truth. Yet, you seem to be avoiding actually reading the Bible (specifically the NT) for yourself. No, I wouldn’t expect you to follow Revelation. Although the letters to the churches in that book do provide evidence of the historical and geographical accuracy of the book. If you are not willing to listen to “The Case for Christ”, “The Case for a Creator”, or to actually read the NT (because you just don’t find it compelling?) then I wonder if you actually want your questions answered.
My attempts to gather evidence for you…to answer your questions…are far less efficient than you simply reading for yourself. I enjoy addressing your questions, but I believe I am a weak communicator compared to the sources listed above.
I will tell you this: I have read the Bible a number of times. I have researched Jesus, God, miracles, creation, evolution, a number of other religions, history (to a relatively small degree), and myself. I have examined many arguments made by skeptics, and have found more than “enough” answers to overcome the few remaining questions I have. In that light, I now believe Jesus did live, die on a Roman cross, and that He died for a reason. I believe He was resurrected and is alive right now in the presence of God. It may sound unbelievable to you, but knowing what I now know, atheism seems far more unbelievable to me. Yes, I made my decision based on faith, but was very satisified to find that facts, logic, and “the evidence” verified my faith. I continue to research “new evidences”, and continue to find even more support for my “faith”.
If you are looking for evidence, I would suggest you stop reading reviews and start reading the books. Compel yourself. If you simply WANT to remain an atheist, not reading the Bible will help. Not reading the “Case” books will help. Expecting me to provide proof of a miracle, or video footage of Christ’s resurrection, or telling the God of the universe that He didn’t do a good enough job of revealing Himself to you and He needs to try again…that will help, too.
If you do decide to “do the reading”, I would be interested to know your thoughts. I really would suggest trying The Message if you do (it is probably also in the Library). Just keep the other versions handy if you think the paraphrase may have strayed from “the original”.
Okay, I must sleep.
I looked for Strobel’s The Case for Christ at two local libraries. One (the more serious one) doesn’t have it. The other has it, but it’s checked out at the moment 🙁
Well, while you are waiting, I will retype some of the info I lost the other night.
Sir William Ramsay:
“I began with a mind unfavorable to it [Acts], for the ingenuity and apparent completeness of the Tubingen theory had at one time quite convinced me. It did not lie then in my line of life to investigate the subject minutely; but more recently I found myself often brought into contact with the Book of Acts as an authority for the topography, antiquities, and society of Asia Minor. It was gradually borne in upon me that in various details the narrative showed marvelous truth.”
Sorry, supper calls.
jp:
As far as I can tell, Ramsay is saying that the book of Acts presents a realistic view of the places, people, mores etc. of the place where it’s set. That has no bearing on whether Jesus lived or performed miracles.
After all, if you watch Spiderman, you’ll see that it shows an accurate depiction of New York: many of the landmarks in the film are real, and can still be seen today. But that doesn’t mean that Spiderman or the Green Goblin are for real.
A lot of urban legends are set in the next town over, and are said to have happened to a friend of the narrator. And yet, most of them are just stories.
Do you have any actual evidence that Jesus existed and performed miracles?
I am pointing to the fact that Luke, the author of “The Gospel of Luke” and “Acts” wrote accurately about the leaders, places, and events of his day. He was not writing a piece of fiction like Spiderman. He was recording events and writing to others (of his day) who could easily verify his words. His own concern with accuracy and truth completely goes against the idea that he would fabricate anything. The same holds true for all of the New Testament writers. You also should examine what their motivation would be for writing what they did. It certainly wasn’t for wealth or popularity. Read Paul’s letters and what he endured. The same was true for all followers of Christ at that time…outcasts, persecution, fear of harm or death. Why? Why stay committed to a man who was hung on a Roman cross? Why set yourself up for a horrible death? That is pretty much what they did. You might suggest they were simply crazy, but if you read their writings they are quite reasoned. I understand your reluctance to even admit Jesus lived, because if you did it would present you with the possibility that what was recorded about Him was accurate. That would, of course, lead to a seemingly insurmountable amount of evidence you don’t have to deal with if you deny He even lived. I would suggest that you have to have at least as much “faith” in atheism as I have in my belief of Christ’s existence given the amount of evidence supporting it. You seem to admit that christians existed within decades of the “time of Jesus”. Did you consider the stretch you have to make to believe they followed someone who never existed? People like James (Jesus brother), or Paul, who persecuted christians for a living? Peter verifies Paul’s persecuting past in his letters. These two writers were quite independent of each other, and were never personally close. You must admit that if the Bible is all made up, it is the most brilliant and cohesive work ever…the hundreds of years between authors, the prophecies, even the accuracy of its reproduction through the ages. I know you don’t have all of the evidence you want, but keep looking. It is there. Keep logic close by and question motives of both arguments.
jp:
I’m not denying that Jesus ever existed. As far as I can tell, there isn’t enough evidence to say with reasonable certainty that he did. Then again, it’s not as if everyone then had an ID card, and most people who lived then have vanished without a trace.
If your claim is that there was a Rabbi Yeshua ben Yossuf who went around Judea preaching around 15-30 CE and was crucified by the Romans, I have no problem with that. That’s entirely plausible.
It’s when you start claiming that miracles occurred that I want some more serious evidence.
Your comment above basically boils down to saying that certain characters in the Bible were fiercely devoted to another character in the Bible, and therefore the Bible is true. In short, you’re saying that the Bible is true because it says so in the Bible. That’s circular reasoning. That’s also why I keep asking for extrabiblical evidence. For instance, why did Herod’s enemies not write anything about the slaughter of the innocents? Why didn’t anyone outside the Bible notice the star hovering above Bethlehem?
The Koran talks about Mohammed riding to heaven on a flying horse. And even today, there are people fiercely devoted to that book. Does that make you more likely to believe it? If not, then you understand how I feel about your book.
As for the wonderfulness of the Bible, which you mention in what would be your last paragraph, had you used paragraphs, I think maybe you should take a course in Bible history: how it was originally assembled, edited, amended, etc.
arensb:
Concerning circular reasoning… if the Bible was one book written by one person at one time, I would agree.
However, it wasn’t. In the New Testament, a number of different people who knew personally Rabbi Yeshua ben Yossuf wrote about their experiences with Him. The fact that different accounts of the same event record that event (even if they happen to vary in detail) support the events occurance.
These “characters” in the Bible were historical people. The letters they wrote and the meticulous historical accuracy of their references support their validity. The writings of different people have been gathered in one volume. The fact that they support each other does not exhibit circular reasoning.
As far as secular historians recording Herod’s slaughter of the innocents or records of a star hovering above Bethlehem:
We ARE talking about 2000 years ago. There are some 5,366 manuscripts of the New Testament with dates within 70 years of their writing. Homer’s “Iliad” only has 643 copies. Julius Caesar’s “Gallic Wars” has but 10, and the earliest of those was made 1,000 years after it was written. We are simply limited on written history that has survived 2,000 years.
For all we know Herod’s enemies did write about “the innocents”.
I am not fiercely devoted to the Bible because others are. I have explored its validity comparing it with geology, archeology, secular history, as well as how well what it actually teaches bears up in life. I tested the consistancy of its teachings. Did they agree with my own inner “morals”? Yes. The Koran? No. How does support for the Koran stack up? It doesn’t. If you apply the same level of scrutiny of the evidence, it simply doesn’t cut it.
Do the number of followers validate anything? Not really. Look at Hitler. Of course, many of his followers were forced to follow. Sound kind of like Islam? Have Christians done similar things? Yes. Were they carrying out the example of Christ or His teachings? No. But followers of Hitler and the Koran were. There is a difference. People have used christianity as a banner to forward their own causes, but not in accordance with Christ’s teachings. The same can not be said for those following Islam.
I actually do know a bit about how the Bible was assembled. What are you referring to?
Sorry about the paragraphs. I was in a bit of a hurry.
jp:
You’re right. It was written by committee. The gospels of Matthew and Luke copied from Mark, various committees decided which books were or were not canonical, there were editorial changes, transcription errors, and lots of other stuff.
My point is that the various books of the Bible are not independent sources. The accounts of Jesus’ life are not like the New York Times and Washington Post both writing about the latest press conference; they’re more like H.P. Lovecraft and August Derleth both writing about Cthulhu; or Jean de la Fontaine and the brothers Grimm writing down the same fairy tale.
You’re saying that Mark waited 40 years to write down the single most important thing that had ever happened to him, one of the most important events in the history of humanity? And that the other evangelists waited even longer?
If the star of Bethlehem really was a star, then it would have been visible around the world. Where are the Chinese or Aztec records of it? If it was, say, a supernova, then we should be able to point a telescope at its remains. Where are they?
Are you arguing that the more often a document is copied, the more likely it is to be true? If so, then rumors are more reliable than newspapers, and the warning you got from your cousin Earl about the FCC wanting to set up an email tax is far more likely to be true than an article in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science.
If you want to argue that the more manuscript copies there are, the better we are able to figure out what the original document looked like, then yes, I agree. But as with your example of the Iliad, that says nothing about whether the events in the original document are true.
In fact, as I recall, most scholars considered the Trojan war to be a myth until the remains of Troy were discovered by archeologists (in the 1930s, IIRC). And that was just a war, something that happens all the time. Shouldn’t your standards of evidence be much higher for something as implausible as people coming back from the dead or walking on water?
Okay, I’ll bite. What does the Bible have to say about geology, and how has it been confirmed?
Also, if I asked you to send $100 to my PayPal account, per Luke 6:30, would you do it?
Oh, so you have no problem with slavery and think that men should rule over women? That polygamy is fine? That genocide is acceptable when it’s commanded by God? Eddie Izzard and Rudy Giuliani are evil for wearing women’s clothes? You think it’s okay to torture someone forever for a finite crime? Convenience store clerks who work on the weekend should be executed?
Or are you picking and choosing from the salad bar of the Bible those parts that are compatible with your morals and ignoring the bits you don’t like?
How do you know? Have you actually read the Koran?
What? Hitler and Muslims follow(ed) the teachings of Christ? I’m pretty sure that’s not what you meant to write. Though one can make a good case that Hitler was a Christian, or at least used religion to manipulate the German people, most of whom were Christians.
I’m not sure anyone has said that anyone follows Islam in accordance with Christ’s teachings.
I’m not sure what you’re getting at in this section. Are you saying that people of all religions can do things (whether good or bad) in the name of that religion? I agree. Are you saying that whenever someone does something bad, their coreligionists will say that they’re not true <whatever>? I also agree. Such is the nature of religion.
But this is beside the point. You might believe that Mohammed actually lived, but presumably you don’t believe that he really flew up to heaven on a magic horse, right? You might believe that the Trojan war took place, but not that Zeus and Athena were involved. Why not? What would it take to convince you that these things actually happened? Do you apply the same standard of evidence to stories in the Bible?
I meant that any unity of theme or cohesiveness or whatever you want to call it is at least in part the result of centuries of transcribers, editors, etc. making changes to the Bible, often to make it say what “everyone knows” it ought to say. The Johannine comma is a good example.
arensb:
The Bible may have been assembled by committee, but not written by committee. It was written by some 35 different authors. It reflects grammatical irregularities which have been edited. There were transcription errors, but relatively few and they were not significant in scope.
I believe that it is believed that Mark may have been used as a source for parts of Matthew and Luke, but that is not known for sure. John obviously was written independently. The different letters were written independently. A number of the Old Testament books were written independently.
As far as the books being written 40 plus years after the event, not everyone who writes about important events in their life sits down the next day and writes a book about it. This would be even more true 2000 years ago. On top of that, oral tradition was used far more commonly at that time.
The star of Bethlehem…there are far too many unknown factors to know exactly what it was. Again, we don’t know if it was recorded by anyone else, because there is an incredible amount of history that has been lost over the course of time.
I don’t find it a key factor one way or the other anyway.
Yes, I was arguing that the greater the manuscripts available, the better the chance of knowing what the original looked like. No, greater numbers don’t prove truth, but they do support accuracy. The nearness in time of recording the events also increase the possiblity of accuracy of the events. Do you know of any other writtings that are 2000 years old that were recorded so close to the event? What about the other books of the New Testament? The letters of Peter, Paul, or James?
Concerning geology: Luke mentions a man named Lysanias, tetrarch of Abilene. He was unknown to modern historians until an inscription was found recording a temple dedication which mentions the name, the title, and is in the right place. The inscription is dated between A.D. 14 and 29, compatible with the beginnings of John’s ministry, which Luke dates by “Lysanias’ reign (Luke 3:1).
The discovery of crucifixion victims in Palestine confirm the methods used in crucifixion by Romans.
In 1968, a burial site was found in Jerusalem containing 35 bodies determined to have suffered violent deaths in the Jewish uprising against Rome in A.D. 70. One of these was a crucifixion victim. The details of his crucifixion experience (legs crushed by a blow, manner of nailing to the cross, etc.) confirmed the New Testament description of Jesus crucifixion.
That Roman historian I mentioned earlier, Tacitus, also wrote another passage you might find interesting:
…Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origen, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilate, and a most mischievous superstion, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their center and become popular…
Luke 6:30. It doesn’t say “give to everyone who asks you whatever they want”. It just says give. Yes, we could go around and around on that one. Not today.
Your questions concerning the “morals” written about in the Bible are posed without complete understanding.
The Bible records that slavery took place. It does not promote it. Paul tells believers to treat slaves like brothers. There is more to this discussion than I have time for, but for now lets move on.
Men rule over Women? It says that husbands should love their wives as Christ loved the Church and gave Himself up for her. They are to love their wives as they do their own bodies. Yes, the husband is the head of the wife, and wives should submit to their husbands. But if the husband is serving her and following Christ’s example of self sacrifice, submission shouldn’t be a problem.
Just because polygamy was recorded in the Bible doesn’t mean it is approved. It isn’t. You will see that when you read it for yourself.
If God judges a people to be evil and commands causes their innihalation, that is His call. Genocide of innocents is abhorant. Just because men claim they are acting on God’s behalf doesn’t mean they are. It also doesn’t mean God doesn’t have the right to judge evil as He sees fit. But I will say there is arguably room to support one act and still not support all examples of similar acts. If I am told to do something proper by someone in authority and I do it, I am being obedient. If I do the same thing but the authority did not want me to do it, I am being disobedient. If I tell others the authority told me to but the authority didn’t, I am lying and open to judgment by the authority (and others as well). I realize this topic is potentially a lengthy one, so I will again move on.
Concerning the Koran, I have not read it thru, but have read a number of its passages. The ones I am referring to are not recording behavior, but demanding behavior. Immoral behavior. For times sake, I move on.
No, I was not implying Hitler or Muslim’s follow Christ’s teachings. Yes, my wording was poor. I meant that the followers of Hitler and Islam were following the teachings of Hitler and Mohammed respectively.
Concerning the stories in the Bible, my point exactly! When I apply the same standards of evidence and support to biblical accounts as I do to Mohammed’s “prophetic” accounts or the evidence supporting the existence of Zeus or Athena, they don’t meet the standard…not even close.
jp,
Please provide an example or two of these universal morals you imply the existence of.