I've been struck by something, something very rare that only happens about once every 3, 4 months at best. Just about this afternoon I was struck by a revelation that revolved around the most hated family in the world, the Westboro Baptist Church - Or more specifically, the leader of the church, Fred Phelps himself.
The religious dogma? The constant parading around and picketing of funerals? The psychotic, single-minded obsession with homosexuality? It's all a diversion. A sham. A play to take your attention away from what the church encompasses, and what Fred Phelps' preaching really stands for beneath the incredibly thick veil of huge colorful signs and intentionally provocative, racist, and sexist interviews/parody videos.
It came to me as a stroke of dawning clarity and comprehension when I tried to deduce the true meaning of the Westboro Baptist Church. Right off the bat I knew it wasn't about religion, it wasn't about preaching the "word of god" or trying to inform the world that homosexuality is somehow the single most heinous crime a sentient being could possibly commit. No, for the kind of true devotion and unwavering defiance the church shows in the face of parading around an obviously lost cause that's been scientifically, logically, and theologically disproven thousands of times in the past few centuries...There has to be something more to it. Something we're not supposed to see, something that all the flashiness and provocative-as-possible messages try their best to cover up.
But what was it? What are those invisible supports holding up the ideology and faith of such clearly educated (And I mean that without sarcasm) individuals? At first, I thought it was something more personal and down to Earth - Fred Phelps was using his twisted view of religion and distorted scripture to create a hollow justification for his own fanatical hatred for homosexuals, most likely spurred by a few extremely repressed 'desires' on the part of Fred Phelps himself. This idea seemed to make some sense, it allowed a feint map of clarity across the Church's useless ideals and cherry-picked biblical verses. Whenever the family was parading around, screaming and shouting about how much their God hated fags and homos, the family members truly believed that there was a wrathful all powerful deity who took the deepest possible offense in same sex relationships. All family members, that is, with the exception of Fred Phelps himself - he's the only one who doesn't believe the lie, because he created it and knows the real ulterior. To the family, wife, and children of Fred, God was theological - a mythical and long-discredited bronze age desert God who apparently has the emotional stability of an insecure bipolar schizophrenic who forgot to take his Valium. But to Fred Phelps himself, its different - every time he reads "God Hates Fags" on the many hand-painted signs his family parades around, he sees the sign for what it is - "I hate fags! I hate them so much! Hate! HATE!".
This was essentially my slowly-pieced together explanation, that Fred himself was using the indoctrination and resultant fanatical fervor of his religious teachings in order to project his own hatred of homosexuals as the word of God himself, possibly to also give him a sense of he himself being God in some twisted way. But then something changed in my mode of thinking - I read a long biography, written by four of Fred Phelps' nine estranged run-away children who, thankfully, live in the present day as self-sufficient adults who are independent of their ultra-zealous family. It was after I read this documentary that I began to realize the full scope of insanity I was dealing with when trying to deconstruct Fred Phelps' mind
I will not go into detail for fear of those among you who have PTSD, but the documentary by his children, named "Addicted to Hate", provided me with some stomach churning insights to the incredibly damaged psyche of this Kansas pastor and 'prophet'. It was also then a very important change occurred in the above hypothesis I had slowly collaborated. It actually wasn't about Fred's own psychotic hatred for the LGBT community at all! But something far deeper, and much, much darker.
The constant hullabaloo about homosexuals was actually another diversion, like their signs, videos, interviews and other such blasphemies against the Christian faith. So that meant the invisible support structure was something entirely different. This is where my readings into the biography of Fred Phelps came into place.
Now, I am a fairly forthright person when it comes to plain-faced evil. I have read countless prisoner of war accounts of Nazi Germany's concentration camps, the vivisections done by Josef Mengele, the Rape of Nanking and Manilla along with the abhorrent human experimentations of Unit 731 - I have read detailed reports of the sickening pleasures of various serial killers throughout the ages, and researched quite vigorously the horrific situations that exist in modern day Africa, North Korea, and the Middle East.
Despite this, I am willing to make the following statement: Based on what I read and heard from Phelps' four runaway children, and what they wrote in their Biography of their father, I can say without any shadow of a doubt in my mind that Fred Phelps is perhaps one of the most violently sadistic, pain obsessed, sadomasochistic, tyrannical, egotistic, and unrepentantly malevolent psychopaths that are still alive to this day - and if not that, /the/ most.
Though, you may be wondering what this has to do with the modification I made to my original theory, that of the Church's hatred merely being a mirror of the Phelps' own hatred masquerading in disguise as biblically justified scripture-based morality and whatnot. And I'll tell you: I noticed a pattern. A pattern that constantly kept emerging, but I dismissed as mere background noise, a simple unintended side-effect of their hysterical propaganda and willingness to let the world know of "God's word".
That pattern is the suffering they cause. Or rather, the suffering that Fred Phelps has directly, indirectly, advertently, and inadvertently caused. This is where my revelation became to take form, you see. The Westboro Baptist Church isn't about religion...It's not about preaching a message of a wrathful god, or blathering about how homosexuality is somehow immortal - It isn't even about hatred, the thing that the WBC so often indulges and bathes itself in.
It's about causing pain. That is what's holding up the church and its followers at the very foundations: That is what Fred Phelps is ultimately trying to accomplish when you manage to see past his facade of fanatical self-proclaimed righteousness. Fred Phelps has created an organization, a Church, and molded it into the perfect tool of his desire, the only desire Fred has, the only desire that brings him any amount of pleasure in his own pathetic, miserable life - The desire to inflict as much mental torment and physical agony unto others as humanly possible. And what's more? He has succeeded, he created a near-perfect family that knows nothing; No emotions or feelings other than hatred, malice, spite, rancor, resentment, and loathing- and he unleashed that family unto the world...And laughed as he beheld the misery and anguish they sowed in his name.
Fred Phelps, I believe, is not a religious nutcase. He's not a closed-minded bigot, or even a senile racist old grandpa - he's perhaps worse than all of those combined. Phelps is a genuine psychopath, a psychopath whose only goal in life and single driving ambition is to see others suffer in any way possible, whether physical, psychological, or emotional. A psychopath who has learned how to play by the rules of society...And win. No amount of hollow and feigned preaching can deter me from the clarity of what I have just realized. For behind the masquerade of incessantly nagging self-righteousness, lies the exact opposite of what Fred Phelps so vainly proclaims himself to be. A saddening display of deceit and trickery which ultimately unveils to expose nothing more than a shameful, jaded, hateful, and astoundingly bitter shell of a sadistic old man who has a mind so utterly damaged beyond repair that the only way he can find any sense of self-worth and fulfillment in his own empty and meaningless life is by causing as much wanton and senseless misery in the lives of others as humanly possible.
I had an epiphany once. But a doctor gave me a shot and it cleared up.
In all seriousness, I think it is possible for someone to be BOTH mentally ill and a psychopath on top of being one or the other. Fhelps has screws loose just like any maffia member like Buldger did.
I think the either or look on psychology needs to change. Just like chaos vs order is wrong, it is both, with overlap.
The other danger I see in singling him out is when delusions are valued in mass. We consider him nuts because he does not have the numbers. But why is it considered perfectly sane for someone to fight for their god? People have been doing that and still do that with far worse results that Phelps could ever hope to commit.
There are quite sane people as well who are sociopaths who become heads of very exploitative businesses, big banks that caused the great recession. The damage financially caused by their narcissism and "I'm rich I cant do anything wrong" caused the collapse of several industries, made people lose their retirement savings and houses and jobs.
I am glad Phelps is as nutty as he is, it allows him to be spotted more easily. I'd worry more about those with money, power and the delusion they can't do anything wrong.
Quote from: "Brian37"There are quite sane people as well who are sociopaths who become heads of very exploitative businesses, big banks that caused the great recession. The damage financially caused by their narcissism and "I'm rich I cant do anything wrong" caused the collapse of several industries, made people lose their retirement savings and houses and jobs.
I am glad Phelps is as nutty as he is, it allows him to be spotted more easily. I'd worry more about those with money, power and the delusion they can't do anything wrong.
Difference.
A sociopath is someone who is calm. Collected. Calculating. But also has no sympathy or empathy at all for his fellow man.
A psychopath is someone who is violent. Unpredictable. Erratic. Prone to unprovoked fits of rage. Completely off the hook. But also has no sympathy or empathy at all for his fellow man.
Phelps would fall into the latter, easily.
My friend emailed me all the contact info for all the members of that church. Apparently someone hacked in to their system and it was leaked a while back.
I tend to not give the extremists too much attention. It always seems the more attention they get, no matter if it's good or bad, the more validation they get as a force and the more they persist as idiots.
Phelps strikes me as someone who profits hansomly from selling his message of hate. The more money he can make from it the better then he can unleash more hate and make more money.. It's about the money. Find a group supposedly despised by everyone, spread a nasty message about them then rake in the dough. It's a time tested tactic and it happens to work.
Quote from: "Voskhod"Quote from: "Brian37"There are quite sane people as well who are sociopaths who become heads of very exploitative businesses, big banks that caused the great recession. The damage financially caused by their narcissism and "I'm rich I cant do anything wrong" caused the collapse of several industries, made people lose their retirement savings and houses and jobs.
I am glad Phelps is as nutty as he is, it allows him to be spotted more easily. I'd worry more about those with money, power and the delusion they can't do anything wrong.
Difference.
A sociopath is someone who is calm. Collected. Calculating. But also has no sympathy or empathy at all for his fellow man.
A psychopath is someone who is violent. Unpredictable. Erratic. Prone to unprovoked fits of rage. Completely off the hook. But also has no sympathy or empathy at all for his fellow man.
Phelps would fall into the latter, easily.
So? Screwing your fellow human is still screwing your fellow human. You can shoot someone suddenly or boil the lobster slowly. The only difference is tactic.
I fear more the wolf in sheep's clothing than the blatant nuts that make it obvious.
APA got it (because we've been through this before). Notice the profession that so many of the Phelps clan chose. Spew a message of hate, have people react badly to it and sue them. If you lose, you lost nothing but a filing fee, because your attorney is a member of your immediate family.
And how do you get people to react most badly? You do things that even extremists would consider outrageous. You vilify a fallen hero. You stomp on the flag.
It's about money, not about Christianity.
Even atheists have people profiting from the hatred of religion. Vilify the clergy, especially the dreaded pedophile priests and give it some thought. It won't take long to see dollar signs. If I had the money right now I'd be running ChristianFuckBuddies.com. It's about the $$$. Although...a friend suggested IslamicFuckBuddies and let the feds pay to put me in witness protection.. less work involved. :)
Priest are nonproductive hypocrites that prey on the credulity and ignorance of their fellow unthinking man and little boys. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ I never knew it could be so easy. :shock: :lol: Solitary
Quote from: "Solitary"Priest are nonproductive hypocrites that prey on the credulity and ignorance of their fellow unthinking man and little boys. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ I never knew it could be so easy. :shock: :lol: Solitary
You never noticed those pretty buildings all over town that are only open one day a week a few hours a day? Hint: They're not all banks, but it's tough to tell sometimes.. look for the stained glass windows and the $100000 automobile parked in the lot.
Quote from: "Colanth"APA got it (because we've been through this before). Notice the profession that so many of the Phelps clan chose. Spew a message of hate, have people react badly to it and sue them. If you lose, you lost nothing but a filing fee, because your attorney is a member of your immediate family.
And how do you get people to react most badly? You do things that even extremists would consider outrageous. You vilify a fallen hero. You stomp on the flag.
It's about money, not about Christianity.
BINGO! It is never about ideology or labels or boarders. It is about resources.
That is not to say that delusion does not exist, or that Phelps is sane. Just that we are rats out for cheese. Civil society has learned to adjust. Marketers, sane or insane look to corner, and exploit for their own gain.
Quote from: "Brian37"Quote from: "Colanth"APA got it (because we've been through this before). Notice the profession that so many of the Phelps clan chose. Spew a message of hate, have people react badly to it and sue them. If you lose, you lost nothing but a filing fee, because your attorney is a member of your immediate family.
And how do you get people to react most badly? You do things that even extremists would consider outrageous. You vilify a fallen hero. You stomp on the flag.
It's about money, not about Christianity.
BINGO! It is never about ideology or labels or boarders. It is about resources.
That is not to say that delusion does not exist, or that Phelps is sane. Just that we are rats out for cheese. Civil society has learned to adjust. Marketers, sane or insane look to corner, and exploit for their own gain.
I actually never realized that. It does make a LOT of sense though.
really a damn shame though, what an absolutely fuckin brilliant poe.
I never doubted Phelps is a very bright guy. And I could also agree that he is a psychopath, and a very twisted one at that. Despite all the animosity against him, there are certainly people that buy into his rhetoric. But his congregation doesn't grow, so that is apparently not his point. All in all I agree with your statement, there is certainly some stuff going on behind the obvious.
And APA is right. He does have a formula that works.
I keep tellin you guys.. Make ChristianFuckBuddies.com the financial wing of atheistforums.com and you could fly us all to [insert sinful resort] once a month for shits n giggles with change left over. :)
Some of you may have heard about the recent deaths of 19 firefighters in a terrible forest fire in Yarnell, Arizona, which is close to Prescott, where I live. Their deaths were a blow to the whole community, and it has been touching how several cities have banded together to donate money to the families, some of whom lost their homes as well as their loved ones. The Westboro fucktards planned on picketing their funeral, for what convoluted and stupid reasons only they can possibly know. What they do is, they stand around picketing, and they wait for someone, anyone, to start trouble with them, because some of their members are lawyers and are just itching to file lawsuits that will leave families devastated. That is how bad they are. They are not funny or amusing anymore, they are horrible, horrible people who need to be stopped. I do not know why these cults are tolerated. I think that most other countries would have shut them down long before now, and put some of the members in prison.
At any rate, a strange thing happened on their way to Prescott: a bunch of people created a human shield, including 300 bikers (some of them from the Hell's Angels group), the Patriot Guard, and many locals. Check out this video, which makes me proud to live in Prescott:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tExseFVM ... e=youtu.be (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tExseFVMQDg&feature=youtu.be)
The result is that Westboro reconsidered their plan to picket in Prescott, Arizona. These assholes CAN be defeated when enough people stand up to their bullying. And that is what they are: a cult of stupid, inbred, hateful bullies.
(How do you embed a video on this site? Doesn't seem to work no matter what I try.)
Quote from: "Brian37"I had an epiphany once. But a doctor gave me a shot and it cleared up.
[youtube:2vgsobsi]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsB2KGaX6bg[/youtube:2vgsobsi]
I can't stand Fred Phelps and his church. I think protesting someone's funeral, purposefully inflicting pain on people who have suffered the loss of a loved one and who are at their most vulnerable, especially for his own ridiculous political/religious agenda and ego, is particularly loathsome.
Westboro Baptist by no means represents all of Christianity, let me just say that much. The majority of us aren't hate-filled demons. Indeed, in my opinion, Westboro Baptist can't be considered Christian at all, not when they throw away every teaching of Christ in the name of their personal agendas.
I think atheists obsess over the WBC because it's so extreme. It's not reasonable to compare Christianity with the WBC when there are roughly 80 members.
And as ApostateLois said, they're not a church, they're a cult.
Well..at least nobody is singing their praises. Anyone else want to say how shitty they are? Its not as if theres a shortage of us not liking them so the more the merryer. :)
Quote from: "AllPurposeAtheist"I keep tellin you guys.. Make ChristianFuckBuddies.com the financial wing of atheistforums.com
Christianmingle.com beat us to it. (That's "sign up to get laid but pretend you're doing it in Jesus' name.com".)
Quote from: "ApostateLois"At any rate, a strange thing happened on their way to Prescott: a bunch of people created a human shield, including 300 bikers (some of them from the Hell's Angels group)
Hell's Angels seems to have a new chew-toy - WBC. This isn't the first time Phelps & Co. had to choose between going home and climbing over a lot of bikes.
Quote from: "Cthulhu's_Priest"Westboro Baptist can't be considered Christian at all, not when they throw away every teaching of Christ in the name of their personal agendas.
There are thousands of Christian sects, most of which don't have even a passing acquaintanceship with the Bible.
"Teaching of Christ"? Paul speaks of a space-dwelling (or heaven-dwelling) Christ, not a man physically present on Earth. Everything he knows about Jesus is either from the scriptures (which would have been the OT at that time, which mentions nothing about Jesus, because the Babylonian Jews who wrote it had no concept of Jesus, so it's all in Paul's head - deliberately made up or imagined) or Jesus "told him", but not being a physical entity, that's either fraud or schizophrenia. Read the authentic letters and you'll see. (Not everything claimed to be written by Paul is authentic - even most Christian apologists agree.)
The Gospels ... Well, Matthew is based on Mark and Q, Luke is clearly based on Mark and Q (and knows nothing of Matthew) and some original material (which the author states is his own interpretation). John seems to be based on word-of-mouth renditions of the earlier ones. Dates? No way to tell. About the only thing we know is that the first three don't mention anything later than 90 CE. But a novel placed in the civil war wouldn't mention Sherman tanks either. "Internal evidence", the only dating method possible for these works, is as accurate as guessing. A novel that mentions Lincoln having been shot last night wasn't necessarily written on April 16, 1865.
We also have no idea who the authors were. The gospels are clearly not historical renditions. Not even Jesus' closest friends could have known his literal thoughts. Much of the story is pure nonsense - like the inn. Rome required that everyone return to his place of residence for their censuses, not to his place of birth. That would have meant that Mary and Joseph would have been home, Jesus would have been born in a plain ordinary way (in his mother's bed), no wise men, no animals, etc. Rome NEVER required people to return to their place of birth.
But someone writing a few centuries later might not have known that, and he'd be writing for an audience that wouldn't catch the mistake.
So please spare us "teachings of Christ" as if it's any less a myth than the teachings of Harry Potter.
There's no reason for that kind of venom. I accept that you disagree, but there was no call for an attack like that.
I never said anything about Paul. Paul was simply a man, and much of what he says is - in my opinion - completely invalid. I said that Westboro Baptist threw away the teachings of Christ - love your neighbor, etc. - in the name of pure, blatant hatred. Think what you will about Jesus, but his teachings were never malevolent.
And as for the ambiguous dating, well, I am of the very, very tiny group that don't believe the modern scripture is 100% accurate, that's it's been corrupted. Obviously none of us can know for sure, however, and you seem to be ignoring the many successful endeavors to chart an accurate timeline for the New Testament. The genealogies in the gospels help quite a bit with pinpointing the era. And please don't bring up the difference between the two genealogical records as if that invalidates scripture - one record was for Joseph, one was for Mary. I hope you have enough dignity to not try the cliche attacks.
And Bethlehem was Joseph and Mary's original residence. They moved to Nazareth some time after leaving Egypt (which they journeyed to to escape Bethlehem, you may recall). That much is clear from a dedicated reading of the scripture - which I would suggest to you, if you intend to afflict the comfortable for a few more years. It might help you if you understood the source material a little better. But that's simply a suggestion.
And the teachings of Christ? Regardless of what you think of the man (whether he was God or a psychopath), his teachings are valuable. How could you say that loving your neighbor and sacrificing your needs for someone else's are childish? Even if you think the religion is full of idiots and murderers, the teaching itself is priceless. It is far superior to something as useless and banal as Harry Potter, and remarks of that nature don't make your points any less insulting and incorrect.
I want to say again, for the record, I accept your disagreement. I am a huge believer in freedom of religion. And I hope I didn't make it seem as though I thought you were stupid. You seem very intelligent. If I did insult you in any way, please accept my apologies.
God bless you in everything you do.
Plenty of confirmed real people were preaching the "love thy neighbor" shtick long before Jesus supposedly existed. I will credit Gautama Siddartha before I ever credit Jesus.
Also, Harry Potter is amazing and you are a bloody heathen for thinking otherwise.
Quote from: "Cthulhu's_Priest"Westboro Baptist by no means represents all of Christianity, let me just say that much.
Of course.
QuoteThe majority of us aren't hate-filled demons.
Hatemongers. And yes, Of course.
QuoteIndeed, in my opinion, Westboro Baptist can't be considered Christian at all, not when they throw away every teaching of Christ in the name of their personal agendas.
A Christian who disavows an ostensibly Christian group. How rare.
And often, these sorts of disavowals seem to be motivated not by any major difference in religious beliefs but by the fact that the organization is so thoroughly disliked that the tacit association has become embarrassing. Curious. :-k
While I strongly oppose violence of any kind, and am as far from recommending this as one could be, it wouldn't surprise me if someone exercised his 2nd amendment right and walked into their Sunday service shooting. They might later picket the funerals of the victims.
Horrible and wrong, but poetic.
Frank
Most of the teachings in the bible are either so obvious that you don't need the bible to back them up because they're self-evident (like "love thy neighbour", which has been around since the dawn of time), completely worthless (like "don't eat shellfish") or actually bad for society (like god's apparent problem with homosexuals and unruly children, although those commandments are mostly ignored, except for the apparent problem with homosexuals).
So basically, the net gain from reading the bible is either zero (if you're already a sensible person who knows how to determine right/wrong on their own, because you'll have to discard a lot of it and already know the rest) or negative (if you copy all morals from the bible, which would turn you into a horrible person that would condone slavery, abhor homosexuality, and stone to death children for disobeying their parents, along with a handful of positive traits that everyone in the world who didn't read the bible will also have because they're common sense)
I don't see an added advantage to reading it, really. Good morals stand on their own. The best religion can do is teach dumb people morals by saying "this and don't think about it", but only if religion is imparted by someone who actually wants to help, for which the bible would be a terrible resource. The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster works far better in that regard, because it leaves out all the horrible morals and preaches only the positive ones. The worst religion can do is teach people terrible morals, because those are indefensible (like hatred of people of a different faith or sexual orientation or whatever) except by invoking non-logical arguments like "god demands it, and no, you cannot ask him yourself".
> And please don't bring up the difference between the two genealogical records as if that invalidates scripture - one record was for Joseph, one was for Mary. I hope you have enough dignity to not try the cliche attacks.
The fact of the matter is that the genealogies are at odds with each other. For example, Joseph has two different fathers. One genealogy for Joseph goes all the way through, and then skips to Mary at the last moment.
> And Bethlehem was Joseph and Mary's original residence. They moved to Nazareth some time after leaving Egypt (which they journeyed to to escape Bethlehem, you may recall).
Except we know from Roman and Jewish records of the time that Nazareth didn't exist in the first century of the Christian calendar. It didn't come into being until around 100 years after the traditional date for Jesus' birth. The Old Testament says that the messiah would be a Nazarene, which means a member of a strict and self-abasing sect. The New Testament writers, having no knowledge of the area, thought it meant someone from a place called Nazareth.
> That much is clear from a dedicated reading of the scripture - which I would suggest to you, if you intend to afflict the comfortable for a few more years. It might help you if you understood the source material a little better. But that's simply a suggestion.
I've read the scriptures, cover to cover. They are nonsense. For example, they claim that on Jesus' death, the bodies of dead and buried saints arose from their graves and "appeared unto many." Yet not a single contemporaneous writer comments on this. All the appearances of the resurrected Jesus listed in Matthew are in Galilee, while all the appearances of the resurrected Jesus listed in Luke are in Jerusalem. People remember where they were when emotional events occur. Clearly, these stories couldn't be from eye witnesses.
> And the teachings of Christ? Regardless of what you think of the man (whether he was God or a psychopath), his teachings are valuable. How could you say that loving your neighbor and sacrificing your needs for someone else's are childish?
There's not a single saying attributed to Jesus that wasn't said by someone else either before him or around the same time. Jesus ben Pantera had a last supper, complete with the wine and bread. The golden rule goes back at least to the Code of Hammurabi. How is "If you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one" valuable? Even the Lord's Prayer comes from John the Baptist.
There's no evidence that there was an historical Jesus, and even if there was, his message was derivative and plagiarized.
Frank
Quote from: "Cthulhu's_Priest"There's no reason for that kind of venom. I accept that you disagree, but there was no call for an attack like that.
What venom, what attack? Not accepting that your myth is factual is an attack?
QuoteI never said anything about Paul.
Paul is our only original source of Yeshua.
QuoteI said that Westboro Baptist threw away the teachings of Christ
And I said that "the teachings of Christ" is simply a myth - that no such person existed.
Quotelove your neighbor
Hammurabi, basically. And probably old by his time.
QuoteThink what you will about Jesus, but his teachings were never malevolent.
Those of us who think he was purely mythological don't think his teachings were malevolent. Or existent at all.
QuoteAnd as for the ambiguous dating, well, I am of the very, very tiny group that don't believe the modern scripture is 100% accurate, that's it's been corrupted.
I don't base scriptural argument on "modern scripture", I base it on the Hebrew (for the OT) and Greek (for the NT) documents.
QuoteObviously none of us can know for sure, however, and you seem to be ignoring the many successful endeavors to chart an accurate timeline for the New Testament.
Only if by "successful", you mean the apologistic attempts to prove that they are what they claim to be. I don't ignore the many evidences that none of the gospels were written earlier than the second century. (And possibly no earlier than the fourth.)
QuoteAnd Bethlehem was Joseph and Mary's original residence.
Rome required people to return to their PRESENT residences, so where they originally came from was irrelevant.
QuoteThey moved to Nazareth some time after leaving Egypt
Not possible, since "Nazareth" was invented (probably in the mid-second century, maybe later) to fill the need for a "Nazarene" Jesus.
QuoteThat much is clear from a dedicated reading of the scripture
Scripture can't be used to prove scripture.
Quotewhich I would suggest to you, if you intend to afflict the comfortable for a few more years.
I'd suggest that you learn Hebrew and Greek first, so we might be talking about the same documents.
QuoteIt might help you if you understood the source material a little better.
If 60 years of intense study yields no understanding, it's amazing that we came down from the trees.
QuoteAnd the teachings of Christ? Regardless of what you think of the man
As I said, if "he" was just a myth, he never "taught" anything.
Quotehis teachings are valuable.
Teachings like forsaking your parents? Like keeping slaves? Teachings like condemning a tree for not bearing out of season? Yes, very valuable, those.
QuoteHow could you say that loving your neighbor and sacrificing your needs for someone else's are childish?
I never said they were childish, I said they weren't the teachings of the myth called Jesus.
QuoteEven if you think the religion is full of idiots and murderers, the teaching itself is priceless.
And at least 1,800 years old when Paul invented Jesus.
QuoteIt is far superior to something as useless and banal as Harry Potter
Harry Potter teaches self-respect. Leave it to a theist to denigrate that.
QuoteIf I did insult you in any way, please accept my apologies.
God bless you in everything you do.
The apology for that last line is accepted. It's about the most insulting thing you could have said.
QuoteWestboro Baptist by no means represents all of Christianity, let me just say that much.
No, they are not, and we can all be thankful that such extremism is now a rare thing. But they do use Bible verses to support their rabid claims, which leads me to wonder how God could inspire a book that can be so horribly misinterpreted and twisted to suit the most evil agendas of the most evil individuals. I expect better of a god.
Quote from: "Cthulhu's_Priest"And the teachings of Christ? Regardless of what you think of the man (whether he was God or a psychopath), his teachings are valuable.
Valuable and useful, but far from unique. It's not like that's the first time in human history that anyone figured out you should be respectful of other people, be kind to each other, put the needs of others ahead of your own, etc. If Jesus existed at all, he was just another itinerant preacher telling an apocalyptic message to a sinful nation, instructing everyone to give up their possessions because they wouldn't be needing them after God gave everyone the smack-down. Being nice to each other? Well, that was just preparation for the end-times disasters, so that God would find them worthy of entering his kingdom. Jesus fully expected to come back to Earth within a few days of being executed. That, of course, did not work out too well for him.
By the way, Paul's writings actually were written earlier than the gospels. If the gospels were not included in the New Testament, I am sure that Christians would have a very different view of Jesus. They would know nothing of his birth, and little of his death and resurrection. They would know nothing of the Magi, the magical star (or angel) that guided them to Mary's house, the slaughter of the innocents by Herod, very little of the 12 apostles, and indeed nothing of Mary or Joseph. His miracles, his sermons, his teachings, his trial at the Sanhedrin, the three thieves on the crosses—none of that was known to Paul. Jesus was entirely a spiritual entity, living in the spirit world, fighting a spiritual battle for our souls. Paul never quotes a single thing that Jesus said in the gospels, which is very strange. It's like writing a book about Hitler and never quoting from "Mein Kampf." Why didn't Paul know anything about the physical, earthly Jesus?
Quote from: "ApostateLois"Why didn't Paul know anything about the physical, earthly Jesus?
Because Jesus and the "scriptures" (the OT), his only "sources", never told him about a physical, earthly Jesus. That was made up MUCH later.