Resurrection/Jesus proofs

[Kaninchen]

Now, back to my original question. Since 2008, you have used the phrase “pious fiction” just over 30 times…once or twice in dialogue with a Muslim early on, but more recently, you bring that out when chatting with Christians. It seems to be your “Get Out of Jail Free” card, because playing it allows you to skate from any real discussion.

My goodness, I’ve used the phrase six times a year, there’s obviously no stopping me.

This year, the Kaninchens went on holiday, as usual, to Italy and it included a couple of weeks in Rome where we haven’t been for several years and it was rather nice to be there again - even if one can feel Baroque-d into submission from time to time.

Of course, one felt obliged to visit the old Ghetto area again (bit like Christian visitors feel the need to revisit certain Churches or whatever, I expect) and it makes you think (I’m half Italian-Jew, after all) of all those Jews walled-up in a tiny area and, if that wasn’t bad enough, forced to attend weekly Christian sermons and not complain/fall asleep.

I expect that, while the Priest was lecturing them about the wonders of Christianity, they’d rather wished for a ‘Get Out Of Jail Free’ card or other ways of saying ‘don’t believe a word of it’ as politely as possible.

I am interested to know exactly how you can justify calling the Bible (Hebrew and Christian Scriptures combined) a work of “pious fiction” when the historical evidence I presented suggests that the Apostles were NOT fictional characters nor were they merely historical figures in a fictional text.

Because your evidence didn’t prove anything of the sort.

You made the assertion; the burden of proof is on you. Let’s hear your presentation.

You’re the one in sales, not me.

 

[daler]

My goodness, I’ve used the phrase six times a year, there’s obviously no stopping me.

You’re the one in sales, not me.

Kaninchen,

. You are truly hilarious!.. LOL

. Maybe you should consider writing a book. You know, like “Pulp Fiction”?

. I gotta tell you, the Title alone would sell hundred thousand copies. The Ouiga Board forecasts another New York Times Bestseller:

. “Pious Fiction” (Buy it now at Barnes and Noble…

.

 

[Goya]

The thing is that any number of religions can tell similar stories so at what point did their fiction end and their historical religious entity begin?

I should point out something here.

Jews don’t believe that anybody is disadvantaged in any way for not believing as we do.
In other words, there’s no sense in which I would prefer it if you stopped believing what you believe in - the best thing for any Christian is to be the best kind of Christian they can be.

That’s because the Jews take their own high work of Pious Fiction–what we call the Old Testament–quite literally, and therefore believe that they, and only they, are the ‘chosen people’, to the exclusion of virtually every other human being on the planet, that is not Jewish.

…but then, I suppose they’ve amended their ‘pious work of fiction’–or at least the contemporary application of it–to permit for the liberal interpretation of ‘chosen people’ to include non-Jews who ‘live according to the law’–gotta’ stay competitive to survive in the market place, I suppose…

…and I suppose that one can take liberties at will, with the inspired Word of God, as one sees fit, once we remove the pesky obstacle of that silly notion of divine inspiration, and knock it down a few pegs, to “pious work of fiction”.

I guess that makes everything…[snap]…what’s that word…ah yes…kosher.

 

[Goya]

Where is ‘anywhere’?

Or, as Pontius Pilate famously put it:

What is Truth?

 

[Kaninchen]

That’s because the Jews take their own high work of Pious Fiction–what we call the Old Testament–quite literally, and therefore believe that they, and only they, are the ‘chosen people’, to the exclusion of virtually every other human being on the planet, that is not Jewish.

The problem with (some) Christians commenting on concepts such as ‘chosen people’ is that they think that Judaism works in the same way as Christianity, that it is ‘exclusive’. Christians believe that their religion is necessary for ‘salvation’ where we don’t believe that anybody is in need of ‘salvation’ in the Christian sense - nobody is doomed to anything by not being Jewish and we don’t get an elevated position for being Jewish.

I guess that makes everything…[snap]…what’s that word…ah yes…kosher.

No, just another dose of religious indigestion.

 

[Kaninchen]

Kaninchen,

. You are truly hilarious!.. LOL

. Maybe you should consider writing a book. You know, like “Pulp Fiction”?

. I gotta tell you, the Title alone would sell hundred thousand copies. The Ouiga Board forecasts another New York Times Bestseller:

. “Pious Fiction” (Buy it now at Barnes and Noble…

.

 

[Goya]

The problem with (some) Christians commenting on concepts such as ‘chosen people’ is that they think that Judaism works in the same way as Christianity, that it is ‘exclusive’. Christians believe that their religion is necessary for ‘salvation’ where we don’t believe that anybody is in need of ‘salvation’ in the Christian sense - nobody is doomed to anything by not being Jewish and we don’t get an elevated position for being Jewish.

No, just another dose of religious indigestion.

A convenient interpretation of the Old Testament, only made possible–or possibly tenable–by treating it as a ‘pious work of fiction.’

Got it. You don’t accept any part of the Bible as ‘inspired Word of God’.

But at least we’ve gotten past the pretense of only treating the New Testament as ‘a pious work of fiction’.

 

[Kaninchen]

A convenient interpretation of the Old Testament, only made possible–or possibly tenable–by treating it as a ‘pious work of fiction.’

Got it. You don’t accept any part of the Bible as ‘inspired Word of God’.

But at least we’ve gotten past the pretense of only treating the New Testament as ‘a pious work of fiction’.

While I don’t claim to be the clearest writer around, I do think you’re reading what you want to read rather than what I’m writing.

 

[Goya]

While I don’t claim to be the clearest writer around, I do think you’re reading what you want to read rather than what I’m writing.

You didn’t write this?

we don’t believe that anybody is in need of ‘salvation’ in the Christian sense - nobody is doomed to anything by not being Jewish and we don’t get an elevated position for being Jewish.

What happens to the people who aren’t of the ‘chosen people’, in your preferred ‘pious work of fiction’?

 

[Kaninchen]

You didn’t write this?

What happens to the people who aren’t of the ‘chosen people’, in your preferred ‘pious work of fiction’?

I’d have thought it was pretty obvious - you get the same in the ‘World To Come’ (well, we get Israel but I think we should have stuck out for Italy).

You just don’t understand the concept of ‘chosen people’, it’s ‘chosen’ to do more, not get more.

 

[Goya]

i’d have thought it was pretty obvious - you get the same in the ‘world to come’ (well, we get israel but i think we should have stuck out for italy).

You just don’t -]understand/-]*** agree with [your] interpretation of*** the concept of ‘chosen people’, it’s ‘chosen’ to do more, not get more.

fify.

 

[Kaninchen]

fify.

Oh, we’re quite used to people being so determined that naughty Jews do/believe very naughty things that they invent their own version.

Nothing new there.

 

[Goya]

Oh, we’re quite used to people being so determined that naughty Jews do/believe very naughty things that they invent their own version.

Nothing new there.

Ok, I’ll bite…so if it’s not your interpretation–chosen to DO, not get–to what end? Perhaps you can provide a few citations from the OT, where anyone who is not of the chosen people benefits at all.

…I’m looking for something along the lines of what another pretty famous Jew wrote about in that other ‘work of pious fiction’–(St. Paul, in the New Testament, that is, vis a vis the Gentiles).

 

[daler]

Ok, I’ll bite…so if it’s not your interpretation–chosen to DO, not get–to what end? Perhaps you can provide a few citations from the OT, where anyone who is not of the chosen people benefits at all.

…I’m looking for something along the lines of what another pretty famous Jew wrote about in that other ‘work of pious fiction’–(St. Paul, in the New Testament, that is, vis a vis the Gentiles).

. As the Heavy Hand of God was upon the Jewish people from the start, chastising them thoroughly for thousands of years, running then out of their lands, dispersed all over the planet, yet promising to lead them home one day to Israel in the latter days, which clearly has occurred, and began with the Edict of Toleration of Religious Freedom in 1844 which paved the way for their return after nearly 2000 years of exile.

. Now they are home, defending the State of Israel, never to leave again their Promised Land, we are assured, for it is God’s will as expressed in His promises, and He keeps His promises. So the question stands to ask: “Chosen for what?”

. The thousands of years of punishment, chastisement, and dispersion throughout the world has indeed created a people who have been forged in the fire, even the holocaust, for a noble purpose - that is, to guard the Sacred Holy Land for the purposes of the further unfoldment of God’s ancient plan and promises since ancient times.

/ I have been on Pilgrimage to Israel twice, each time sensing that the Jewish people themselves just “know” that they are where they are supposed to be at this time, defending the land of Israel, vital in an inextricably bounded purpose related to God’s plan of redemption and bringing about the Kingdom of God on earth. They have been “chosen” for this day, the Day of God, and the Day of Judgement for all mankind…

.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Because your evidence didn’t prove anything of the sort.

Rubbish.

Jesus was a real person.
Peter, Paul and John were real people who knew Jesus who was a real person.
Ignatius, Polycarp and Clement were real people who knew Peter, James and John who were real people and who knew Jesus who was a real person.
Irenaeus was a real person who knew Polycarp who was a real person and who knew Peter and John who were real people and who knew Jesus who was a real person.

See how this goes? These are historical facts…not pious fiction. Now, tell us exactly when the fiction began if you can.

Did Irenaeus simply make up all of “pious fiction”?
Did Polycarp or Clement make it all up? They died for their trouble.
Did Peter, Paul or John make it all up? Two were executed by the Romans and the other died in exile.

When did the historical facts end and the pious legends begin? And why would any one of these folks choose to die rather than to deny a story which they knew to be a complete fabrication?

This is the kind of empty assertion that non-believer tell themselves to avoid dealing with logic and fact.

You’re the one in sales, not me.

All snark and no bite.

You make no attempt to defend your assertion because you know you can’t. Merely claiming that you’ve been through it all before is no excuse…you invest your time here making allegations.

Prove them.

 

[Kaninchen]

Ok, I’ll bite…so if it’s not your interpretation–chosen to DO, not get–to what end? Perhaps you can provide a few citations from the OT, where anyone who is not of the chosen people benefits at all.

…I’m looking for something along the lines of what another pretty famous Jew wrote about in that other ‘work of pious fiction’–(St. Paul, in the New Testament, that is, vis a vis the Gentiles).

Something I’ve said from time to time here (perhaps Randy will count how many times) is that there are often not Jewish answers to Christian questions (and vice-versa). In saying that, I don’t mean that the questions are not answerable but that they’re not answerable without moving somewhat outside the frame of reference within which they’re asked because Christianity and Judaism are not similar religions – Judaism isn’t Christianity minus Jesus and Christianity isn’t Judaism plus Jesus – they don’t ‘work’ in the same way, they don’t focus on the same things.

Christianity puts a lot of emphasis on the ‘afterlife’, Judaism actually puts very little emphasis on the ‘afterlife’, it’s a very ‘here and now’ religion. We also don’t share Christian beliefs in things like ‘Original Sin’, ‘Salvation’, ‘Heaven and Hell’ (we often don’t mean the same things even when we use the same words).

Anyway, after the flood, God made a covenant with humankind (don’t murder, steal, worship false gods, be sexually immoral, eat the limb of a live animal, curse God and do have a legal system) and the Jewish presumption is that if human beings try to live good/ethical lives within the context of that covenant, we all have hope for the World to Come.

That’s it, Goya, that’s what we all can hope for whether one is Jewish or a Gentile. No, we don’t see ourselves all headed for Heaven while wanting to stop everybody else escaping an eternity of Hell as a consequence of Original Sin – that whole business is a Christian concept not a Jewish concept.

Where the ‘chosen’ bit comes in is that, after the Flood, things started going downhill and God decided that he needed to do something and came up with the idea of getting some people/tribe/group to abide by tougher rules in order to be a strong hint to everybody else as to how things should be done – according to Jewish legend he ended up with us because everybody else (wisely?) turned him down.

Anyway, as a performance bonus we get Israel in the World To Come but that’s about it.

These things really belong in the Non-Christian Religions forum, we’re a long way from the topic of this thread.

 

[Kaninchen]

Rubbish.

The fact that there are a chain of named people who claimed/were claimed to be in contact with one another does not validate the entire contents of a collection of stories.

 

[Randy_Carson]

The fact that there are a chain of named people who claimed/were claimed to be in contact with one another does not validate the entire contents of a collection of stories.

So, we can at least agree that the PEOPLE themselves were not fictional characters in a story. This was not so clear from your original assertion:

Originally Posted by Kaninchen View Post
For those of us who see the New Testament as pious fiction, the Apostles are just characters in a story.

Subsequently, you backed away from that:

I never said that they didn’t exist - there’s a difference between ‘existing’ and ‘existing as portrayed in a particular text, set of legends’.

To illustrate the problems with your argument, I’m going to use a modern-day analogy. It’s a bit sensitive, but I think it is one that might have meaning for you.

Some people deny that the holocaust ever happened. They claim that all of the accounts of concentration camps are pure fiction, and they ignore the testimonies of eyewitnesses and survivors. They even go so far as to develop conspiracy theories about how the holocaust has been invented to advance the cause of the Jewish domination of the world’s finances, press, etc. Despite all the evidence to the contrary, they maintain their erroneous position by means of a mental wall that separates what they want to believe from the inconvenient truths of historical fact.

What can be done with such people? How can those whose minds are totally closed to the truth ever be convinced that they are in error?

Similarly, many people find it easier to simply dismiss the claims of Christianity as pious fiction rather than deal with the merits of the historical evidence.

What can be done with such people?

Well, it is not my purpose in this post or thread to convince you that Jesus Christ rose from the dead after being crucified by Romans at the request of the Jewish Sanhedrin. But it is reasonable to insist that you either back up or back off your claim that the New Testament is merely “pious fiction”.

 

[Peter_Plato]

Christianity puts a lot of emphasis on the ‘afterlife’, Judaism actually puts very little emphasis on the ‘afterlife’, it’s a very ‘here and now’ religion. We also don’t share Christian beliefs in things like ‘Original Sin’, ‘Salvation’, ‘Heaven and Hell’ (we often don’t mean the same things even when we use the same words).

Anyway, after the flood, God made a covenant with humankind (don’t murder, steal, worship false gods, be sexually immoral, eat the limb of a live animal, curse God and do have a legal system) and the Jewish presumption is that if human beings try to live good/ethical lives within the context of that covenant, we all have hope for the World to Come.

So you are saying orthodoxy (the things believed) ARE important and do make a difference to (orthopraxy) our actions. In fact orthopraxy is predicated on orthodoxy. No?

Obviously, our actions do come from our beliefs about the world. It would be difficult to deny that. So beliefs must “make a difference” and, if they do, why should they not “be shared.”

I think Jesus said something about putting a light on a stand so it can clearly be seen. You seem to be claiming Jewish beliefs, at least the ones you outlined above, do make a difference in the world. If that difference is a positive one, it would seem that a position of insulation regarding beliefs (keeping them to yourself) would mean denying possible benefits to others. That would be considered stingy if the commodity has any worth. It would seem the only non-stingy reason for “keeping your ideas to yourself” would be if the ideas have no enduring value. Or so it would seem.

 

[Peter_Plato]

Christianity puts a lot of emphasis on the ‘afterlife’, Judaism actually puts very little emphasis on the ‘afterlife’, it’s a very ‘here and now’ religion.

So, whether or not there is an afterlife is an unimportant consideration.

The afterlife, in Christian terms, is eternal existence. Weighed against a temporal existence of 50-80 years, give or take, you are saying eternal vs temporal is not worth any consideration whatsoever? Unimportant? Meaningless? Valueless?

It would seem, at least on the face of it, if life is a valuable commodity, then eternal life would be infinitely valuable. No?

Or does the economic law of diminishing marginal utility apply here?