People need to be told -face to face- few things.....and I do this in both English and Spanish...ja
I've been listening to the renowned Bible scholar and agnostic (non-committed atheist) in Bart Ehrman, and his critique of the New Testament, it is interesting to find the parables that people hold dear in the Bible, such as the time Jesus supposedly had the adulterous woman set free, was actually added to the Bible centuries after his death. I think this would surprise many Christians, though it probably won't stop them from believing, because my studies into psychology, have led me to believe that it is Terror Management Strategy that keeps them believing. Religion has them terrified with stories of Hell and death, so they cling to their faith to minimize their terror.
If one of the most popular stories about Jesus was invented 1000 years later, I wonder which other parables were added to make Jesus appear greater than he likely was in real life.
I haven't found a devout Christian here that I can try this on, but when I do, I'll probably report the result. It's too secular here for such experiments. Sometimes I would have liked it to be like it was 30 years ago when I was surrounded by Christian guinea pigs to test such things on.
I used to test my concepts on street preachers, but I haven't seen any for a long while.
They won't let me copy embedded code to patch the video in, Youtube have stopped that function from working. Ar$holes.
One thing that shows bigtime to me, DD, is the 4 Gospels and how certain events within them have set the date for Jesus' birth anywhere from before BC slightly to maybe 6 AD. This is a 6 or 8 year span and it proves outright that the writers had an agenda but knew nothing of when Jesus was really born. That seems to be about as credible as his death because nobody knows when that is either.
Consider also that Saul of Tarsus was the first to get everything going about Jesus, and the Gospels appear to have not been around when he became Paul.
All of this is what convinced me that atheism is correct because there is no evidence for God and Jesus. Even so, the believers will tell you that the above is all lies and the New Testament books came in the order they are in in the Bible.
Yes, Michael, I believe that Jesus was likely the product of Saul, the con man.
He took somebody possibly named Jesus, that some had known and liked, and pumped him up, out of all proportions, into a demigod.
So Christianity was a Saulian concept.
Some call Saul the antichrist. I'm sure he built Jesus up more than his followers did. Calling him the antichrist is because he changed what Jesus said and who Jesus was. The original followers did not trust or like him. He built Jesus into a superman and the 4 conflicting Gospels that we have followed along to help make the impossible stories. Without Saul of Tarsus there would have been no Jesus as wew know of him today.
It is all in the marketing, isn't it, Michael! Market an inferior product with a lot of promises and some threats; we have a winner.
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. Anonimus
Actually, that was Stephen F. Roberts, Sylvia.
Ii HAVE TWO LISTS OF QUOTES; IN ONE SAYS ANONYMOUS AND IN THE OTHER IT SAYS S. ROBERTS...
Here is what I found about the quote:
"Brief history of The Quote...
"I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."
...Stephen F Roberts
"...Yep, that's me! I am the author of the above quote which has become a bit of a popular statement throughout the net (and some in the real world too).
it's important to me that she does not feel ashamed of embracing reality.
Think about the lack of self confidence in that statement CP. You are obviously undergoing withdrawal symptoms.