Posts by JosephAlward

4

Jesus' Sword

by JosephAlward in

im reposting here an argument that appeared in november, 2001, which received little in the way of meaningful rebuttal.

perhaps rwc and other die-hard inerrantists on this forum will be able to show why we shouldnt believe that matthews claims are ridiculous.. here it is:.

the author of the matthew gospel was by far the most unreliable of the bibles writers, as evidenced by his appalling lack of understanding of the old testament and his willingness to imagine that it was filled with prophecies of the coming savior.. .

JosephAlward

I’m reposting here an argument that appeared in November, 2001, which received little in the way of meaningful rebuttal. Perhaps RWC and other die-hard inerrantists on this forum will be able to show why we shouldn’t believe that Matthew’s claims are ridiculous.

Here it is:

The author of the Matthew “gospel” was by far the most unreliable of the Bible’s writers, as evidenced by his appalling lack of understanding of the Old Testament and his willingness to imagine that it was filled with prophecies of the coming savior.

One of the more ridiculous prophecy-fulfillment attempts by Matthew concerns a speech he says Jesus made about the family unit. Matthew's source for this story is the book of Micah, in which a decayed society and its corrupt rulers are described in disparaging terms:

The godly have been swept from the land…For a son dishonors his father, a daughter rises up against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law – a man's enemies are the members of his own household. (Micah 7:2-6)

Matthew must have only half-remembered what the passage above was about because he mistakenly took the Micah passage to be a prediction of something that would occur when the savior came to earth; he evidently also wrongly thought that Micah was describing something a savior would bring to pass. Thus, presumably without thinking about it too hard, he wrote a story which describes Jesus wanting to turn family members against one another:

Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn "a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law--a man's enemies will be the members of his own household." (Matthew 10:34-36)

This is preposterous; was not Jesus supposed to be infinitely kind? Even if he was only just ordinarily kind, he certainly would never have wished to turn daughter against mother.

Which is more likely? That Matthew was right in his interpretation of Micah, and Jesus really did say these words, or Matthew was wrong, and that this is a false story manufactured from misunderstood or misremembered Old Testament stories, foolishly thought by Matthew to be prophecies of the coming messiah?

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

37

Why Didn't They Know?

by JosephAlward in

the following is excerpted from an article by frank r. zindler, "did jesus exist?

" at http://www.atheists.org/church/didjesusexist.html.

emphasis is added.. john e. remsburg, in his classic book the christ: a critical review and analysis of the evidence of his existence (the truth seeker company, ny, no date, pp.

JosephAlward

The following is excerpted from an article by Frank R. Zindler, "Did Jesus Exist?" at http://www.atheists.org/church/didjesusexist.html

Emphasis is added.

John E. Remsburg, in his classic book The Christ: A Critical Review and Analysis of the Evidence of His Existence (The Truth Seeker Company, NY, no date, pp. 24-25), lists the following writers who lived during the time, or within a century after the time, that Jesus is supposed to have lived:

Josephus * Philo-Judæus * Seneca * Pliny Elder * Arrian * Petronius
Dion Pruseus * Paterculus * Suetonius * Juvenal *Martial Persius * Plutarch * Pliny Younger * Tacitus * Justus of Tiberius * Apollonius Quintilian * Lucanus * Epictetus * Hermogones * Silius Italicus * Statius * Ptolemy * Appian * Phlegon * Phædrus * Valerius Maximus Lucian * Pausanias * Florus Lucius * Quintius Curtius * Aulus Gellius * Dio Chrysostom * Columella * Valerius Flaccus * Damis Favorinus Lysias * Pomponius Mela * Appion of Alexandria * Theon of Smyrna

According to Remsburg, "Enough of the writings of the authors named in the foregoing list remains to form a library. Yet in this mass of Jewish and Pagan literature, aside from two forged passages in the works of a Jewish author, and two disputed passages in the works of Roman writers, there is to be found no mention of Jesus Christ." Nor, we may add, do any of these authors make note of the Disciples or Apostles - increasing the embarrassment from the silence of history concerning the foundation of Christianity.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

54

Bible Fake: Jesus Stills the Storm

by JosephAlward in

i've argued before in this forum that mark wanted to have jesus seem to be the messiah whose existence he believed--or pretended to believe--was prophesied, foreshadowed, or prefigured, by persons and events found in scripture, so he scoured the writings of the prophets for these stories, and adapted them to fit jesus.

i believe the striking parallels below show almost conclusively that mark's story about jesus stilling the storm was adapted from jonah, and is fictional.. in jonah, a violent storm threatens a ship on which jonah sleeps, so mark made a violent storm threaten a ship on which jesus sleeps.

in jonah, the apprehensive sailors waken jonah and question his cavalier attitude toward the danger, so mark made his boat's captain apprehensive also, and had him, too, waken jesus and question him about his seeming lack of concern.

JosephAlward

Had Paul written his own version of the events you describe or his own gospel, it would have been redundant and not the most direct source of the information which was one of the tests for cannonized.

If the Bible editors were concerned about redundancy, as you claim, then how do you explain why the gospels of Matthew and Luke repeat almost verbatim 90% of the stories Mark wrote?

Furthermore, according to you, Mark's information came indirectly from Peter, so if it's true that the Bible writers would only have wanted to include information that was the "most direct," then why did they include Mark's Jesus stories at all?

Finally, according to you, both Paul and Mark got their information about Jesus from Peter. Now, since Paul's writings were closer in time to Jesus, why would the Bible editors not have included Paul's miracle stories, if they had existed? Why not include both sets of miracle stories, if they had existed? Did the Bible writers not show that they weren't the least concerned about the repetition in the four gospels?

Priests and missionaries since the beginning of the Church have been writing letters to churches. I am confident that they do not mention all of the things you list. Does that mean that they never happened?

That's not a sound argument. There would be no historical imperative for priests today, or even a thousand years ago, to repeat all or even most of the miracles stories, since they were common knowledge, and in writing already. But, the situation for Paul is different. Paul wrote at a time when he knew there were no gospel stories in print; the stories by Mark, Matthew, and Luke were still twenty years in the future. Thus, Paul had an obligation to history to record virtually everything he had learned about Jesus, since no one else had done so at that time. We're talking about he most important being since the dawn of time, and Paul was the first person to write about him; we're not talking about priests who lived centuries after the gospel stories had already been canonized and in print for centuries; we're talking about the person who lived about the time of Jesus and who was the first person to write about Jesus. Surely you agree that what Paul might have written about Jesus is vastly more important than what a priest at your local parish might write.

Thus, as the very first historian to record the life of Jesus, one would have expected that the Bible writers would have given precedence to Paul's writing--if they had existed--over those of Mark's, since Paul's would have been closer in time to Jesus than Mark's. At the least, the editors would have included both Paul's writings and Mark's, but certainly not just Mark's alone--if Paul had in fact ever written any miracle stories.

I think we're done with this argument. I'll present another puzzle for you to think about later, in another thread.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

54

Bible Fake: Jesus Stills the Storm

by JosephAlward in

i've argued before in this forum that mark wanted to have jesus seem to be the messiah whose existence he believed--or pretended to believe--was prophesied, foreshadowed, or prefigured, by persons and events found in scripture, so he scoured the writings of the prophets for these stories, and adapted them to fit jesus.

i believe the striking parallels below show almost conclusively that mark's story about jesus stilling the storm was adapted from jonah, and is fictional.. in jonah, a violent storm threatens a ship on which jonah sleeps, so mark made a violent storm threaten a ship on which jesus sleeps.

in jonah, the apprehensive sailors waken jonah and question his cavalier attitude toward the danger, so mark made his boat's captain apprehensive also, and had him, too, waken jesus and question him about his seeming lack of concern.

JosephAlward

My apologies to Yadirf, whose revised post--a revision of the one I didn't understand--slipped by me. In that post, Yadirf pointed to Matthew 24:29 as an example of a miracle which wasn't advertised as coming from God. But, I must disagree; I think the surrounding text makes it clear that the Son of Man. i.e., the son of God, which is the equivalent of God, a miracle maker, is the one which will cause the remarkable events to occur:

27For as lightning that comes from the east is visible even in the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. 28Wherever there is a carcass, there the vultures will gather. 29"Immediately after the distress of those days " 'the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.'

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

54

Bible Fake: Jesus Stills the Storm

by JosephAlward in

i've argued before in this forum that mark wanted to have jesus seem to be the messiah whose existence he believed--or pretended to believe--was prophesied, foreshadowed, or prefigured, by persons and events found in scripture, so he scoured the writings of the prophets for these stories, and adapted them to fit jesus.

i believe the striking parallels below show almost conclusively that mark's story about jesus stilling the storm was adapted from jonah, and is fictional.. in jonah, a violent storm threatens a ship on which jonah sleeps, so mark made a violent storm threaten a ship on which jesus sleeps.

in jonah, the apprehensive sailors waken jonah and question his cavalier attitude toward the danger, so mark made his boat's captain apprehensive also, and had him, too, waken jesus and question him about his seeming lack of concern.

JosephAlward

RWC,

I’m responding to your last post. Please try to answer all of the questions I ask; there are fourteen of them.

You wrote,

Second, let me give you some more examples of where Paul does mention some of the things you list:

1. baptized by John - Acts 13:23-25 ]

23"From this man's descendants God ha brought to Israel the Savior Jesus, as he promised. 24Before the coming of Jesus, John preached repentance and baptism to all the people of Israel. 25As John was completing his work, he said: 'Who do you think I am? I am not that one. No, but he is coming after me, whose sandals I am not worthy to untie.'

This says nothing about John baptizing Jesus, which is what I listed.

2. Tried by Pilate -Acts 13:28

28Though they found no proper ground for a death sentence, they asked Pilate to have him executed.

This was never on my list; maybe you’re confusing the trial with events surrounding the arrest, which I did mention. Why didn’t Paul ever write anything about Judas betraying Jesus, and the mob coming to arrest him, and Peter denying Jesus, and the disciples running away? Aren’t the betrayals by Judas and Peter extremely important? Wouldn’t Paul have mentioned them if he had known about them? Was not Peter an extremely important part of Christianity? Was he not the “rock” on which the church was founded? So, wouldn’t Paul have mentioned that the “rock” betrayed Jesus, if he actually had known about it? Why not?

To counter my claim that Paul seems unaware that God called Jesus his “son,” you offer this:

3. Was called the Son of God - Romans 8:3

3For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering.

This does not show that Paul knew God called Jesus “son”; it only shows that Paul believed that Jesus was God’s son. Why wouldn’t Paul tell his readers that God announced that Jesus was his son, if he had known this?

4. left an empty tomb behind - Acts 13:30

30But God raised him from the dead,

This is not what I asked for; I asked you to explain why Paul didn’t write about Mary finding an empty tomb. Paul makes no reference to the tomb, or to Mary. Why wouldn’t Paul have referred to Mary’s testimony, if he had known about it? Wouldn’t his readers have wanted to know that there was actually evidence that Jesus had left the tomb?

5. taught that Jesus fulfilled the old testament scriptures for the messiah - Acts 13:32; Romans 1:1-6

Acts 13: 32"We tell you the good news: What God promised our fathers 33he has fulfilled for us, their children, by raising up Jesus.

Romans 1: 1Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle and set apart for the gospel of God-- 2the gospel he promised beforehand through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures 3regarding his Son, who as to his human nature was a descendant of David, 4and who through the Spirit of holiness was declared with power to be the Son of God by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord. 5Through him and for his name's sake, we received grace and apostleship to call people from among all the Gentiles to the obedience that comes from faith. 6And you also are among those who are called to belong to Jesus Christ.

This doesn’t begin to address the many miracles I listed in my post. Where are all of the miracles and healings, the calming of the seas, the walking on water, converting water to wine, miraculous feedings, the sending of demons into the herd of pigs, the transfiguration? If Paul had known about them, wouldn’t he have mentioned them, at least once?

6. virgin birth - Romans 1:4 ( by implication)

4and who through the Spirit of holiness was declared with power to be the Son of God

Do you really think this shows that Paul knew that Mary was a virgin when she conceived Jesus? Don’t you think that if Paul knew that Mary was told by the Holy Spirit that she would conceive God’s son he would have told his readers about it? Wouldn’t they want to hear it straight from Paul that Jesus was born of a virgin? If Paul really knew this, then why didn’t he mention it, at least once?

The bottom line is that the assumption you make is absolutely unsupportable and is no evidence that the teachings of the Gospels are false and made up.

You have not addressed the main points of my argument; you have not explained why all of those extremely important events in Jesus’ life were not mentioned by Paul. All you’ve done is show a very few things of a very general nature that Paul did know or think about Jesus, as if you believed that that somehow proved that Paul also knew about all of those other events. You don't show that he had any specific information about any of the miracles, and any of the other marvelous events in Jesus' life which the gospels alleged had occurred. And, you haven’t explained why Paul, who was the very first person to write about Jesus, did not think it was appropriate to record for posterity all of those extremely important events in Jesus’ life, if he knew about them, if indeed they had actually occurred. Why, if Paul really knew about them, did he let the world wait twenty years or more to hear about these events from Mark, Matthew, and Luke?

RWC, please address the main part of my argument: Why did Paul not let the rest of the world know through his writings about the miraculous deeds that Jesus allegedly had performed, if in fact Paul knew about them, if they had indeed happened?

Why did he instead let mankind wait for twenty years or more before they would see in print the miracle stories and other stories about Jesus in print? Wouldn’t Paul have wanted to make sure that as many persons as possible knew about as many of the details of Jesus’ life as possible, if in fact Paul had actually known these details? If not, why not?

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

54

Bible Fake: Jesus Stills the Storm

by JosephAlward in

i've argued before in this forum that mark wanted to have jesus seem to be the messiah whose existence he believed--or pretended to believe--was prophesied, foreshadowed, or prefigured, by persons and events found in scripture, so he scoured the writings of the prophets for these stories, and adapted them to fit jesus.

i believe the striking parallels below show almost conclusively that mark's story about jesus stilling the storm was adapted from jonah, and is fictional.. in jonah, a violent storm threatens a ship on which jonah sleeps, so mark made a violent storm threaten a ship on which jesus sleeps.

in jonah, the apprehensive sailors waken jonah and question his cavalier attitude toward the danger, so mark made his boat's captain apprehensive also, and had him, too, waken jesus and question him about his seeming lack of concern.

JosephAlward

Paul was writing about Jesus twenty or more years before the synoptic authors' gospel stories were written. If Paul knew Jesus

was born of a virgin,
was baptized by John
was called his "son" by the Lord
was transfigured on the mountain
walked on water
stilled storms
converted water to wine
fed nine thousand people on handfuls of bread
cured the deaf and blind
drove demons into a herd of pigs
raised a man from the dead
was betrayed by Judas
was denied by Peter
was abandoned by his disciples
left an empty tomb behind for Mary to find

then why in the world would Paul not have written down this information somewhere, if not in his letters to the churches and certain individuals? Are these events not among the most astonishing for mankind since the beginning of time? If you agree that they are, then how do you explain why wouldn’t Paul have made a permanent record of them, if he really knew about them?

RWC, you say that we should forgive Paul for not describing these events in his letters to "individual churches and in some cases to individuals," because we should assume that they already knew about them. Well, let’s pretend that’s true for now.

But, what about the rest of the world, RWC? What about those people in Israel who had not yet heard the about the many wondrous events I've listed above? Rather than rely on the propagation of what you believe are the oral stories of the many events described above, don't you think that Paul would have written other letters, or even his own "gospels", for those people , and for you and me, if he had really known about these events, if indeed they had even occurred? Don't you think he would want to put down in more permanent form--on paper--a record of the most remarkable events since the dawn of time? Why would he let mankind wait twenty years for Mark, Matthew, and Luke to do this?

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

54

Bible Fake: Jesus Stills the Storm

by JosephAlward in

i've argued before in this forum that mark wanted to have jesus seem to be the messiah whose existence he believed--or pretended to believe--was prophesied, foreshadowed, or prefigured, by persons and events found in scripture, so he scoured the writings of the prophets for these stories, and adapted them to fit jesus.

i believe the striking parallels below show almost conclusively that mark's story about jesus stilling the storm was adapted from jonah, and is fictional.. in jonah, a violent storm threatens a ship on which jonah sleeps, so mark made a violent storm threaten a ship on which jesus sleeps.

in jonah, the apprehensive sailors waken jonah and question his cavalier attitude toward the danger, so mark made his boat's captain apprehensive also, and had him, too, waken jesus and question him about his seeming lack of concern.

JosephAlward

Joseph, are you trying to imply that Paul did nor know that Jesus died on the cross and was than resurrected? Are you trying to imply that Paul did not know he was tried by Pilate?

No, I only imply that since Paul was the first Bible writer to record his knowledge of Jesus on paper, one would expect that he would have reported to his readers--not just his "hearers"--that Jesus was born of a virgin, had God call him his son, was baptized by John, miraculously fed the five thousand, then the four thousand, cured the blind and the deaf, expelled demons into a herd of pigs, walked on water and calmed the sea, brought up Lazarus from the dead, was betrayed by Judas, and was betrayed by Peter, and abandoned by his disciples. He also would have explained what happened on the day of resurrection, how Mary went to the tomb, found it empty, and heard from one or two angels that Jesus was risen. The list of other vital information that Paul did not put in writing is very long, and I will not attempt to put all of the important omissions down here. It is sufficient to say that one would expect that the very first Bible writer to write about Jesus would go out of his way to put these events down on paper, given that these events were among the most important for mankind since the dawn of time. You agree that they were astonishingly important events, don't you, RWC? Why didn't Paul write them down? Why would he let mankind wait for twenty years to hear these stories from Mark, Matthew, and Luke?

I also pointed out to you where he preached to the Jews that Jesus was the messiah from the scriptures, which means that he would preach to them that he fulfilled the messianic prophecies. These would include the virgin birth, the healings and the other miracles. Why isn't that a logical conclusion from the information presented. And why isn't that a more logical conclusion that he didn't know so they were all made up?

Just because Paul taught that Jesus was the messiah doesn't mean that he also had to have taught that Jesus did all of those other things that Paul didn't put in his writings. He certainly would have told them about the many miracles if he had known about them, and since he didn't put them in writing, we should take this as evidence--not proof--that he may not have known about those miracles, and therefore that they didn't occur.

As for the questions, one that I recall was never answered was what is your motivation for all of this? I will look for others.

I fight Biblical literalism because I think it is wrong for intelligent humans to hold nonsensical beliefs, especially if such beliefs weaken us as a civilization.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

14

Bible Contradition: Cursing the Fig Tree

by JosephAlward in

the contradiction below is just one among a great many which show that the bible cannot be trusted to give an accurate account of jesus life.. mark believes that jesus cursed the fig tree before he drove the merchants from the temple:.

the next day as they were leaving bethany, jesus..said to the tree, "may no one ever eat fruit from you again.

" (mark 11:12-14).

JosephAlward

It's not so much the error that gets to me, Joseph......more incriminating is Jesus' attitude towards an inanimate object. This is just not something you can imagine the Son of God doing. It's childish.

I agree with you, Cellomould; it was a very childish, immature act. It was not only childish, but irrational as well. For these reasons, Christians should reject this story as false.

Why should Jesus be angry at the tree for not bearing fruit, when it was not even the season for it to bear fruit? Did Jesus not know that the laws of nature established by his “father,” the Lord, dictated that there was a time for all things, and the time for to fig tree to bear fruit had not yet come? Did this “Jesus” expect the fig tree to perform a miracle for him? Thus, the “Jesus” Mark was describing could not have been the son of most powerful, all-knowing being in the universe, because even five-year-olds in that region knew that fig trees don’t bear their fruit in March.

Seeing in the distance a fig tree in leaf, he went to see whether perhaps he would find anything on it. When he came to it, he found nothing but leaves, for it was not the season for figs. (Mark 11:13-14)

In addition, if Jesus, as the son of the all-knowing God, was omniscient--all knowing, then how come he had to walk over to the fig tree to see that it didn’t have figs on it? Wouldn’t an all-knowing being know where he stood that the tree was bare without having to walk over to look at it?

There are so many ridiculous aspects of this story that only one with a child-like, all-accepting, all trusting mind would choose to believe this story.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

14

Bible Contradition: Cursing the Fig Tree

by JosephAlward in

the contradiction below is just one among a great many which show that the bible cannot be trusted to give an accurate account of jesus life.. mark believes that jesus cursed the fig tree before he drove the merchants from the temple:.

the next day as they were leaving bethany, jesus..said to the tree, "may no one ever eat fruit from you again.

" (mark 11:12-14).

JosephAlward

The contradiction below is just one among a great many which show that the Bible cannot be trusted to give an accurate account of Jesus’ life.

Mark believes that Jesus cursed the fig tree before he drove the merchants from the temple:

The next day as they were leaving Bethany, Jesus..said to the tree, "May no one ever eat fruit from you again." (Mark 11:12-14)
On reaching Jerusalem, Jesus entered the temple area and began driving out those who were buying and selling there. (Mark 11:15-19)

Matthew, however, believes that Jesus cursed the fig tree after he had driven the merchants from the temple:

Jesus entered the temple area and drove out all who were buying and selling there...And he left them and went out of the city to Bethany, where he spent the night. (Matthew 21:12-17)
Early in the morning, as he was on his way back to the city, he was hungry. Seeing a fig tree by the road, he...said to it, "May you never bear fruit again!" (Matthew 21:18-20)

Both of these accounts cannot be true at the same time, so at least one of them is in error, or perhaps both of them are. In either case, the Bible is in error--again.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

54

Bible Fake: Jesus Stills the Storm

by JosephAlward in

i've argued before in this forum that mark wanted to have jesus seem to be the messiah whose existence he believed--or pretended to believe--was prophesied, foreshadowed, or prefigured, by persons and events found in scripture, so he scoured the writings of the prophets for these stories, and adapted them to fit jesus.

i believe the striking parallels below show almost conclusively that mark's story about jesus stilling the storm was adapted from jonah, and is fictional.. in jonah, a violent storm threatens a ship on which jonah sleeps, so mark made a violent storm threaten a ship on which jesus sleeps.

in jonah, the apprehensive sailors waken jonah and question his cavalier attitude toward the danger, so mark made his boat's captain apprehensive also, and had him, too, waken jesus and question him about his seeming lack of concern.

JosephAlward

RWC,

None of the references you cited show that Paul was aware of all of the miracles I listed. Evidently, such evidence does not exist, so we should move on to other matters.

You indicated that there are questions you asked that you would like me to answer. In the past, when you overlooked questions I asked, I just asked them again. If you would do the same, and list all of the questions you would like me to answer, I will try to answer them all.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html