Is the New or Old Testament more believable?

[pakeha]

Or the Book of Abraham.

 

[Jules Galen]

Thanks for the invite. I think the OT is more believable because it has the more compelling character: the Jewish nation. I've read over and over that the Jews are an historical anomaly, that all their contemporaries in antiquity have perished through dispersion or absorption, and that only the Jews have maintained a common identity throughout the intervening centuries through the Torah. That anomalous nature of the Jews suggests (doesn't prove) divine intervention.

Cpl Ferro

Well...given that logic, then it can also be suggested that if there is a God, then he hates the Jews for he keeps setting them up to fail. I mean, if there was a "God of the Jews", then don't ya' think he would have don e something about the Holocaust....or maybe that was Jesus' payback for the Jews killing him on a cross?

See how crazy a belief in the Ghosts can get?

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

The OT is completely fictional; the NT is almost completely fictional.

Egypt and Babylon did exist. Otherwise, yeah.

 

[Frozenwolf150]

I mean, if there was a "God of the Jews", then don't ya' think he would have don e something about the Holocaust....or maybe that was Jesus' payback for the Jews killing him on a cross?

Well, that was certainly at the heart of Christian anti-Semitism over the centuries. They labeled the Jews "god-killers" and used that to justify discrimination, segregation, violent persecution, and pogroms against the Jews. This is also why when someone finally did start killing the Jews in large numbers, most people looked the other way. Oh, and anti-Semitism didn't die with the Holocaust either.

Never mind that it was the Romans who did it.

 

[CplFerro]

Well, that was certainly at the heart of Christian anti-Semitism over the centuries. They labeled the Jews "god-killers" and used that to justify discrimination, segregation, violent persecution, and pogroms against the Jews. This is also why when someone finally did start killing the Jews in large numbers, most people looked the other way. Oh, and anti-Semitism didn't die with the Holocaust either.

Never mind that it was the Romans who did it.

Oh, that old lie. If the Scriptures are themselves fiction then who knows what happened. If they're not, or if for purposes of argument we're saying they're not, then the Jews and the Romans obviously cooperated on Jesus' death. The Romans were the hit man, the Jews were the mob boss ordering the hit. If not for the Jews, there would have been no hit out on Jesus. Call the Romans useful idiots. God I hate that stupid lie.

Cpl Ferro

 

[CplFerro]

Well...given that logic, then it can also be suggested that if there is a God, then he hates the Jews for he keeps setting them up to fail. I mean, if there was a "God of the Jews", then don't ya' think he would have don e something about the Holocaust....or maybe that was Jesus' payback for the Jews killing him on a cross?

See how crazy a belief in the Ghosts can get?

The explanation would be it was punishment for transgressions, or some kind of teachable moment, or a setup for a greater good to come. Or whatever.

Cpl Ferro

 

[CplFerro]

An historical anomaly, why?
You might as well argue the Ancient Egyptians were an anomoly.
Or the Chinese.

Nothing suggests the 'compelling' character of Jesus wasn't a compilation of other characters or total fiction, correct me if I'm wrong.

It's the idea that it's this tiny tribe that somehow rolled lucky sevens a hundred times in a row and outlived all the other tribes that existed throughout the Middle East and presumably elsewhere. The advocates of this theory might be ignoring primitive tribes in the Amazon, but they can't prove anything about their own lineages, being illiterate. Larger nations like Greece and India have lasted a long time, but the index finger points to the Assyrians, the Babylonions, and the sundry "ites" that have long since been swept away, absorbed, destroyed, or otherwise changed into the political order we see today.

Cpl Ferro

 

[Brainache]

Oh, that old lie. If the Scriptures are themselves fiction then who knows what happened. If they're not, or if for purposes of argument we're saying they're not, then the Jews and the Romans obviously cooperated on Jesus' death. The Romans were the hit man, the Jews were the mob boss ordering the hit. If not for the Jews, there would have been no hit out on Jesus. Call the Romans useful idiots. God I hate that stupid lie.

Cpl Ferro

Maybe so, but don't forget that Jesus was Jewish himself, so if not for the Jews, there wouldn't be a Jesus at all. He was supposed to be the fulfillment of Jewish prophecies, come to save the children of Israel etc.

Also, his sacrifice is supposed to be the whole point of his incarnation, isn't it? If he wasn't nailed to a cross, his mission would have been a failure...

So how do you vilify the Jews in general and "Judas" in particular for carrying out the will of God? No Jews, no Jesus, no crucifixion, no resurrection, no Christianity.

Seems to me that Christians should be praising the Jews for their crucial role in founding the whole religion.

 

[tsig]

Maybe so, but don't forget that Jesus was Jewish himself, so if not for the Jews, there wouldn't be a Jesus at all. He was supposed to be the fulfillment of Jewish prophecies, come to save the children of Israel etc.

Also, his sacrifice is supposed to be the whole point of his incarnation, isn't it? If he wasn't nailed to a cross, his mission would have been a failure...

So how do you vilify the Jews in general and "Judas" in particular for carrying out the will of God? No Jews, no Jesus, no crucifixion, no resurrection, no Christianity.

Seems to me that Christians should be praising the Jews for their crucial role in founding the whole religion.

It follows that since Judas had the courage to obey god's will and set it all in motion even though he knew he'd be misunderstood he should be one of the greatest saints.


Of course, there's no reasoning in religion.

This is the verse that most apologists use:

Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!

 

[Frozenwolf150]

Oh, that old lie. If the Scriptures are themselves fiction then who knows what happened. If they're not, or if for purposes of argument we're saying they're not, then the Jews and the Romans obviously cooperated on Jesus' death. The Romans were the hit man, the Jews were the mob boss ordering the hit. If not for the Jews, there would have been no hit out on Jesus. Call the Romans useful idiots. God I hate that stupid lie.

Cpl Ferro

I'm not sure the Jews were to blame at all, for the following reasons. Jesus was tried and convicted under Roman laws, not Jewish laws. At the time, the Jews were an oppressed minority living under Roman rule, and didn't have the power to carry out executions on their own. Jesus was killed by crucifixion, which is a Roman method that they used on tens of thousands of victims. Had the Jews killed him, it would have been by stoning. Also, three of the four Gospel authors were Jewish, writing at a time when blaming the Roman authorities for killing Jesus could have gotten them in a lot of trouble. Therefore it wouldn't surprise me if they purposely altered the details of the story to exonerate the Romans. Finally, there's Pontius Pilate himself. He was a brutal Roman prefect who would have had no moral qualms about executing people left and right. To him, Jesus would have been nothing but a pathetic little worm, a troublemaker who needed to be dealt with so he would no longer disrupt the peace. I don't think he would have let himself be pressured by the Jews to do anything he didn't intend to do in the first place.

 

[Giordano]

It's the idea that it's this tiny tribe that somehow rolled lucky sevens a hundred times in a row and outlived all the other tribes that existed throughout the Middle East and presumably elsewhere. The advocates of this theory might be ignoring primitive tribes in the Amazon, but they can't prove anything about their own lineages, being illiterate. Larger nations like Greece and India have lasted a long time, but the index finger points to the Assyrians, the Babylonions, and the sundry "ites" that have long since been swept away, absorbed, destroyed, or otherwise changed into the political order we see today.

Cpl Ferro

Ha! As I posted, I'm culturally Jewish, and if Jews are considered to have been helped by God, then no thanks. Such historic suffering over and over again: the destruction of the temple, the Diaspora, the Holocaust, and more. As already explained: a lot of people in the world had much better luck. We've rolled craps many times. The Egyptians are at least as ancient and yet had moe luck! There are many others. If for some reason you are only counting small tribes: how about the Hawaiins?

 

[Giordano]

Oh, that old lie. If the Scriptures are themselves fiction then who knows what happened. If they're not, or if for purposes of argument we're saying they're not, then the Jews and the Romans obviously cooperated on Jesus' death. The Romans were the hit man, the Jews were the mob boss ordering the hit. If not for the Jews, there would have been no hit out on Jesus. Call the Romans useful idiots. God I hate that stupid lie.

Cpl Ferro

Why on Earth would you say that the Jews are to blame if the Scriptures are fiction right after you say if the Scriptures are fiction, then we do not know what happened? The Scriptures are fiction, and we have no idea who, if anyone, colluded with the Romans to kill Jesus, if he was alive at all. Outside of the Scriptures, where do you see mention of a role played by the Jewish people in Christ's death. Even though Christ is Jewish in the Scriptures it is the Scriptures that convinced people that the Jews helped kill Christ.

 

[Giordano]

The explanation would be it was punishment for transgressions, or some kind of teachable moment, or a setup for a greater good to come. Or whatever.

Cpl Ferro

Or whatever... Who are we to figure out the unfathomable (and very easily annoyed) mind of God?

 

[Vortigern99]

[Nitpick]Star Wars is a space opera not science-fiction, that would be like trying to compare Star Trek with Lord of the Rings.[/nitpick]

As a genre fan and resident Star Wars know-it-all, I must in turn nitpick that the Saga presents a science-fiction setting to tell a mythic or fantastical tale. The "Star" in the title, the non-stop interstellar vistas, spaceships and other high-tech machinery conspire to maintain a "science-y" look and feel. In short, it can correctly be categorized as a science fiction film.

If you're still not convinced, I've got the fallback position that science fiction is fantasy and vice versa, but perhaps this isn't the thread for that.

 

[Vortigern99]

Why on Earth would you say that the Jews are to blame if the Scriptures are fiction right after you say if the Scriptures are fiction, then we do not know what happened? The Scriptures are fiction, and we have no idea who, if anyone, colluded with the Romans to kill Jesus, if he was alive at all. Outside of the Scriptures, where do you see mention of a role played by the Jewish people in Christ's death. Even though Christ is Jewish in the Scriptures it is the Scriptures that convinced people that the Jews helped kill Christ.

And even taking the Scriptures as gospel (heh), the question remains why anti-Semitic bigots aren't fuming mad, rather, at the Romans -- and by extension, all Italians -- for actually killing and torturing Christ. Then again, since his death ostensibly leads to humanity's salvation, you'd think all Christians everywhere would be overjoyed with either Romans, or "the Jews", for committing/ordering the act which led to their contractual immortality. I digress.

 

[ProBonoShill]

Neither is believable, the central figure in both books, that being the fairy sky daddy, never existed.

 

[SezMe]

Also, three of the four Gospel authors were Jewish ....

Uh, my current understanding is that we have no idea who the authors of the Gospels are. Cite for this claim?

 

[pakeha]

Oh, that old lie. If the Scriptures are themselves fiction then who knows what happened. If they're not, or if for purposes of argument we're saying they're not, then the Jews and the Romans obviously cooperated on Jesus' death. The Romans were the hit man, the Jews were the mob boss ordering the hit. If not for the Jews, there would have been no hit out on Jesus. Call the Romans useful idiots. God I hate that stupid lie.

Cpl Ferro

Fact or fiction for the gospel accounts?
How about another option- propaganda/hagiography?

In any case, CF, the events of 69-70 would go a long way to dispelling the idea the Romans were the Jews' hit-men, don't you think?

It's the idea that it's this tiny tribe that somehow rolled lucky sevens a hundred times in a row and outlived all the other tribes that existed throughout the Middle East and presumably elsewhere. The advocates of this theory might be ignoring primitive tribes in the Amazon, but they can't prove anything about their own lineages, being illiterate. Larger nations like Greece and India have lasted a long time, but the index finger points to the Assyrians, the Babylonions, and the sundry "ites" that have long since been swept away, absorbed, destroyed, or otherwise changed into the political order we see today.

Cpl Ferro

Would you compare this tribe to be something like the Romani people^WP?

 

[SpuriusMaximus]

Fact or fiction for the gospel accounts?
How about another option- propaganda/hagiography?

In any case, CF, the events of 69-70 would go a long way to dispelling the idea the Romans were the Jews' hit-men, don't you think?

I don't think that anyone says that the Jews ruled the Romans, essentially. Just that in one specific incident, as described in the gospels, the Roman governor accepts doing what the priesthood demands, to keep the situation from getting out of hand. That he accepted taking a hit on one guy in one occasion, doesn't mean he'd always take orders from them.

 

[SpuriusMaximus]

Oh, that old lie. If the Scriptures are themselves fiction then who knows what happened. If they're not, or if for purposes of argument we're saying they're not, then the Jews and the Romans obviously cooperated on Jesus' death. The Romans were the hit man, the Jews were the mob boss ordering the hit. If not for the Jews, there would have been no hit out on Jesus. Call the Romans useful idiots. God I hate that stupid lie.

Nevertheless, even in the example you use, most would have no problem with saying that the hitman killed the mark. He may not be the one who asked for that murder, but he IS nevertheless the one who consciously accepted to do it, and the one who actually did it.

Even affirmative defences like claiming duress do not actually mean 'I wasn't the one who killed the guy'. It just means 'I had no other choice'.

The fact of the matter is that Pilate was not mind controlled. Nor does he seem to be the uber-meek kind that always appeases a mob by giving them whatever they want, if we believe Josephus or Philo.

Nor do other Roman governors seem to think they're there as powerless servants of the local priesthood. Quite the contrary in fact. And I don't mean just in Josephus, but even the bible itself, or more specifically Acts, doesn't support such a notion.

Yet here he acts like a crooked judge who'll dispense injustice for political considerations. I don't see how that absolves him of all guilt.

And even as duress goes, it would have been rather easy to defuse. The whole situation is only critical because it's right before passover, and the city is an overpopulated powder-keg. But public executions on that holy day wouldn't really calm people down. Quite the contrary. Pilate could just say, "Let's not spoil your holiest day with this. Throw him in the dungeon, I'll deal with him later." Voila, situation defused.

It seems to me like he had a choice, and chose to execute someone who he considered to be innocent. Seems to me like I can blame him just fine, regardless of who originated that idea.