Why I Don't Believe

[alang1216]

lol, dude.....does Paul talk about Jesus ministry?......pretty much non stop.....

You should have no problems providing examples of Paul quoting Jesus or talking about his ministry. I'm not talking about theology. I'm happy to admit when I'm wrong so go for it.

St Paul quoted Jesus fairly frequently in his letters, you ignorant fuck.

If you knew damned thing about Christianity other than the atheist moron talking points you might know that.

So are you going to give me an example of Paul quoting Jesus or are you also an ignorant fuck?

 

[PostmodernProph]

I'm not talking about theology.

well there's your problem then, you're just in the wrong forum.....

 

[alang1216]

Paul was NOT familiar with Jesus' life and teachings. How often does he quote Jesus or talk about his ministry? The only thing about Jesus that was important to Paul was the resurrection. To Paul it was not about the religion Jesus preached, that was Judaism, it was about Jesus as Messiah.

lol, dude.....does Paul talk about Jesus ministry?......pretty much non stop.....

You should have no problems providing examples of Paul quoting Jesus or talking about his ministry. I'm not talking about theology. I'm happy to admit when I'm wrong so go for it.

I'm not talking about theology.

well there's your problem then, you're just in the wrong forum.....

Or maybe just talking to the wrong people. I prefer to talking to people who know what they're talking about and can back up what they say. Or at least admit when they're wrong. I guess you are not one of those.

 

[PostmodernProph]

lol, dude.....does Paul talk about Jesus ministry?......pretty much non stop.....

You should have no problems providing examples of Paul quoting Jesus or talking about his ministry. I'm not talking about theology. I'm happy to admit when I'm wrong so go for it.

I'm not talking about theology.

well there's your problem then, you're just in the wrong forum.....

Or maybe just talking to the wrong people. I prefer to talking to people who know what they're talking about and can back up what they say. Or at least admit when they're wrong. I guess you are not one of those.

sorry.....its just lack of experience.....I'm not sure what being wrong would feel like.......

 

[alang1216]

sorry.....its just lack of experience.....I'm not sure what being wrong would feel like.......

I sympathize, I once thought I had made a mistake but it turned out I was wrong.

 

[JimBowie1958]

You should have no problems providing examples of Paul quoting Jesus or talking about his ministry. I'm not talking about theology. I'm happy to admit when I'm wrong so go for it.

St Paul quoted Jesus fairly frequently in his letters, you ignorant fuck.

If you knew damned thing about Christianity other than the atheist moron talking points you might know that.

So are you going to give me an example of Paul quoting Jesus or are you also an ignorant fuck?

lol, you posturing hypocrite.

Here is one passage and I will not give you another.

Galatians 1
11 I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin. 12 I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.

13 For you have heard of my previous way of life in Judaism, how intensely I persecuted the church of God and tried to destroy it. 14 I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people and was extremely zealous for the traditions of my fathers. 15 But when God, who set me apart from my mother’s womb and called me by his grace, was pleased 16 to reveal his Son in me so that I might preach him among the Gentiles, my immediate response was not to consult any human being. 17 I did not go up to Jerusalem to see those who were apostles before I was, but I went into Arabia. Later I returned to Damascus.

18 Then after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to get acquainted with Cephas and stayed with him fifteen days. 19 I saw none of the other apostles—only James, the Lord’s brother. 20 I assure you before God that what I am writing you is no lie.

21 Then I went to Syria and Cilicia. 22 I was personally unknown to the churches of Judea that are in Christ. 23 They only heard the report: “The man who formerly persecuted us is now preaching the faith he once tried to destroy.” 24 And they praised God because of me....

St Paul then goes on to describe how he confronted the other Apostles in Jerusalem to include St Peter for deviating from what Christ had taught them.

1 Corinthians 11
23 For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.”

Here he states clearly that Jesus had passed the command to do Communion to him personally.

Jesus taught large numbers of people and many who heard them were spying on Him, and that likely includes St Paul who claimed that Jesus Himself had taught Paul various things.


There, I just wasted 30 minutes of my life finding verses for you who will never read them in context or give them much thought, you slimy PoS.

 

[alang1216]

St Paul quoted Jesus fairly frequently in his letters, you ignorant fuck.

If you knew damned thing about Christianity other than the atheist moron talking points you might know that.

So are you going to give me an example of Paul quoting Jesus or are you also an ignorant fuck?

lol, you posturing hypocrite.

Here is one passage and I will not give you another.

Galatians 1
11 I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin. 12 I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.

13 For you have heard of my previous way of life in Judaism, how intensely I persecuted the church of God and tried to destroy it. 14 I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people and was extremely zealous for the traditions of my fathers. 15 But when God, who set me apart from my mother’s womb and called me by his grace, was pleased 16 to reveal his Son in me so that I might preach him among the Gentiles, my immediate response was not to consult any human being. 17 I did not go up to Jerusalem to see those who were apostles before I was, but I went into Arabia. Later I returned to Damascus.

18 Then after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to get acquainted with Cephas and stayed with him fifteen days. 19 I saw none of the other apostles—only James, the Lord’s brother. 20 I assure you before God that what I am writing you is no lie.

21 Then I went to Syria and Cilicia. 22 I was personally unknown to the churches of Judea that are in Christ. 23 They only heard the report: “The man who formerly persecuted us is now preaching the faith he once tried to destroy.” 24 And they praised God because of me....

St Paul then goes on to describe how he confronted the other Apostles in Jerusalem to include St Peter for deviating from what Christ had taught them.

1 Corinthians 11
23 For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.”

Here he states clearly that Jesus had passed the command to do Communion to him personally.

Jesus taught large numbers of people and many who heard them were spying on Him, and that likely includes St Paul who claimed that Jesus Himself had taught Paul various things.

There, I just wasted 30 minutes of my life finding verses for you who will never read them in context or give them much thought, you slimy PoS.

Interesting speculations but that is all they are. As Paul writes, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ, in other words he never spoke Jesus while he was alive only after he died. This makes perfect sense since Paul was a persecutor of heretics and he would likely have put Jesus in that camp. He did not become a Christian until he encountered the resurrected Christ and that could only have occurred after Jesus' death.

You can rewrite history and scripture until your heart's content but I'd suspect you are all alone in this world of your own making.

Your insults are wasted on me, they just reinforce my impression of you as only posing as a Christian. And someone who can shout loudly about his faith but has little real understanding of Christianity.

Did Paul Ever Meet Jesus?

Q. We first wanted to thank you for your website on the Bible and Jesus Christ. We have a question about the Apostle Paul that we hoped you may be able to answer. I was at a Sunday school class and asked the question, did Paul ever meet Jesus? The answer I got from the group was no. On the road to Damascus Paul met Jesus after he had ascended into heaven. Was Jesus’s appearance physical or spiritual? Please give us some insight.

A. There’s no indication from Scripture that Paul and Jesus ever met before the Damascus Road incident. And Acts 9:4-7 doesn’t specify whether the Lord’s encounter with Paul was physical or not. It only says Paul saw a bright light and heard a voice. The men with him heard a loud sound but didn’t see anything. In subsequent re-tellings of the encounter Paul never indicated that He had actually seen Jesus at that time.
from: http://gracethrufaith.com/ask-a-bible-teacher/did-paul-ever-meet-jesus/

 

[sealybobo]

I will believe you are not a Christian when you can show that you are able to break away from Christian beliefs. So far, you have shown no such ability.

I do not say Atheists should prove god doesn't exist, I say that anyone has to prove statements made as if they were fact. I don't care what statement they are making. Atheists don't get a free ride. If you are making the claim, then the burden is on you. When you say there is no god that cares for you, and I believe it was you who said that, then either produce the evidence to support that claim or admit it is pure belief. And if it is pure belief, then don't pat yourself on the back about how rational you're being.

Why is it now that we have developed rational inquiry we hear only a deafening silence from a god who once supposedly engaged regularly in human affairs? Why does god not simply speak to us or appear before us as he supposedly used to? Why are we the losers in the dice roll of time? If a god places such a high value on us worshipping and believing then why not simply make its existence obvious to us?
.

Because God only speaks to those who are willing to hear, dumbass liar.

And only people that are willing to see your invisible friend can see him right? Fucking retard.

 

[sealybobo]

I will believe you are not a Christian when you can show that you are able to break away from Christian beliefs. So far, you have shown no such ability.

I do not say Atheists should prove god doesn't exist, I say that anyone has to prove statements made as if they were fact. I don't care what statement they are making. Atheists don't get a free ride. If you are making the claim, then the burden is on you. When you say there is no god that cares for you, and I believe it was you who said that, then either produce the evidence to support that claim or admit it is pure belief. And if it is pure belief, then don't pat yourself on the back about how rational you're being.

Why is it now that we have developed rational inquiry we hear only a deafening silence from a god who once supposedly engaged regularly in human affairs? Why does god not simply speak to us or appear before us as he supposedly used to? Why are we the losers in the dice roll of time? If a god places such a high value on us worshipping and believing then why not simply make its existence obvious to us?

If one accepts the prevailing scientific understanding of the development of the universe, yet also believes in one of the major religions, then presumably a god sat idle for 13.7 billion years – waiting as the stars, galaxies and planets formed. Then it watched with complete and utter indifference as modern Homo Sapians evolved, struggled and died for a further 150,000 years. Finally, a few thousand years ago, this god suddenly decided to reveal itself to several people in the most primitive, illiterate and remote portions of humanity in a completely unverifiable way – and then simply disappeared.

I have no idea. Now.... let me know when you have objective evidence to share. Until then, you're just spouting religious beliefs and treating it as if you knew something.

All we are saying is that we don't believe in your god or any god(s).

No religion required to not believe something.

Is bald a hair color?

 

[PostmodernProph]

Why is it now that we have developed rational inquiry we hear only a deafening silence from a god who once supposedly engaged regularly in human affairs? Why does god not simply speak to us or appear before us as he supposedly used to? Why are we the losers in the dice roll of time? If a god places such a high value on us worshipping and believing then why not simply make its existence obvious to us?

If one accepts the prevailing scientific understanding of the development of the universe, yet also believes in one of the major religions, then presumably a god sat idle for 13.7 billion years – waiting as the stars, galaxies and planets formed. Then it watched with complete and utter indifference as modern Homo Sapians evolved, struggled and died for a further 150,000 years. Finally, a few thousand years ago, this god suddenly decided to reveal itself to several people in the most primitive, illiterate and remote portions of humanity in a completely unverifiable way – and then simply disappeared.

I have no idea. Now.... let me know when you have objective evidence to share. Until then, you're just spouting religious beliefs and treating it as if you knew something.

All we are saying is that we don't believe in your god or any god(s).

No religion required to not believe something.

Is bald a hair color?

an agnostic does not know if you have hair or not.....
an atheist denies you have hair.....

a theist just chooses to believe you're ugly......

 

[JimBowie1958]

So are you going to give me an example of Paul quoting Jesus or are you also an ignorant fuck?

lol, you posturing hypocrite.

Here is one passage and I will not give you another.

Galatians 1
11 I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin. 12 I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.

13 For you have heard of my previous way of life in Judaism, how intensely I persecuted the church of God and tried to destroy it. 14 I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people and was extremely zealous for the traditions of my fathers. 15 But when God, who set me apart from my mother’s womb and called me by his grace, was pleased 16 to reveal his Son in me so that I might preach him among the Gentiles, my immediate response was not to consult any human being. 17 I did not go up to Jerusalem to see those who were apostles before I was, but I went into Arabia. Later I returned to Damascus.

18 Then after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to get acquainted with Cephas and stayed with him fifteen days. 19 I saw none of the other apostles—only James, the Lord’s brother. 20 I assure you before God that what I am writing you is no lie.

21 Then I went to Syria and Cilicia. 22 I was personally unknown to the churches of Judea that are in Christ. 23 They only heard the report: “The man who formerly persecuted us is now preaching the faith he once tried to destroy.” 24 And they praised God because of me....

St Paul then goes on to describe how he confronted the other Apostles in Jerusalem to include St Peter for deviating from what Christ had taught them.

1 Corinthians 11
23 For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.”

Here he states clearly that Jesus had passed the command to do Communion to him personally.

Jesus taught large numbers of people and many who heard them were spying on Him, and that likely includes St Paul who claimed that Jesus Himself had taught Paul various things.

There, I just wasted 30 minutes of my life finding verses for you who will never read them in context or give them much thought, you slimy PoS.

Interesting speculations but that is all they are. As Paul writes, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ, in other words he never spoke Jesus while he was alive only after he died.

No, that doesn't follow at all. In order for it to be affirming some miraculous revelation, then St Paul could not have been present when Jesus taught, but there is no reason to believe he was not. In fact, given the small townishness of Jerusalem at that time, it is almost inconceivable that a committed traditional Jew like St Paul would not have gone to see and hear Jesus preach in Jerusalem when He was there.

This makes perfect sense since Paul was a persecutor of heretics and he would likely have put Jesus in that camp. He did not become a Christian until he encountered the resurrected Christ and that could only have occurred after Jesus' death.

Which is why he would have gone to see Jesus, to gather evidence against Him.

You can rewrite history and scripture until your heart's content but I'd suspect you are all alone in this world of your own making.

There is no history to rewrite. No one says if St Paul met Jesus inn the flesh or not, but Paul speaks of Jesus revealing God's Truth to him. The Holy Ghost or Holy Spirit is the normal agency of inspiration, not direct revelation from the Son, Jesus Christ.

IF you knew as much about Christian theology as you claim, you would recognize that.

Your insults are wasted on me, they just reinforce my impression of you as only posing as a Christian. And someone who can shout loudly about his faith but has little real understanding of Christianity.

My insults are simply for my own enjoyment. You are a liar and a pig, and it pleases me to point that out.

Did Paul Ever Meet Jesus?

Q. We first wanted to thank you for your website on the Bible and Jesus Christ. We have a question about the Apostle Paul that we hoped you may be able to answer. I was at a Sunday school class and asked the question, did Paul ever meet Jesus? The answer I got from the group was no. On the road to Damascus Paul met Jesus after he had ascended into heaven. Was Jesus’s appearance physical or spiritual? Please give us some insight.

A. There’s no indication from Scripture that Paul and Jesus ever met before the Damascus Road incident. And Acts 9:4-7 doesn’t specify whether the Lord’s encounter with Paul was physical or not. It only says Paul saw a bright light and heard a voice. The men with him heard a loud sound but didn’t see anything. In subsequent re-tellings of the encounter Paul never indicated that He had actually seen Jesus at that time.
from: Did Paul Ever Meet Jesus? | GracethrufaithGracethrufaith

lol, all they are saying is that there is no Biblical passage for Paul meeting Jesus, but absence of evidence is not evidence of absence and every schoolboy knows, or used to know until you libtards fucked it all up, that little rule.

There is no biblical passage that St Mark was born of a woman either, and yet people assume it for obvious reasons, so absence of Biblical verse is not proof of anything at all.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Why is it now that we have developed rational inquiry we hear only a deafening silence from a god who once supposedly engaged regularly in human affairs? Why does god not simply speak to us or appear before us as he supposedly used to? Why are we the losers in the dice roll of time? If a god places such a high value on us worshipping and believing then why not simply make its existence obvious to us?

If one accepts the prevailing scientific understanding of the development of the universe, yet also believes in one of the major religions, then presumably a god sat idle for 13.7 billion years – waiting as the stars, galaxies and planets formed. Then it watched with complete and utter indifference as modern Homo Sapians evolved, struggled and died for a further 150,000 years. Finally, a few thousand years ago, this god suddenly decided to reveal itself to several people in the most primitive, illiterate and remote portions of humanity in a completely unverifiable way – and then simply disappeared.

I have no idea. Now.... let me know when you have objective evidence to share. Until then, you're just spouting religious beliefs and treating it as if you knew something.

All we are saying is that we don't believe in your god or any god(s).

No religion required to not believe something.

Is bald a hair color?

Yes. It is a zero measure, but still a measure. Were we to talk about a rock having hair and how many hairs it had, that would be a null measure, though one could still measure, it wouldn't be a valid measure since there is no expectation of hair on a rock.

That is what measuring is about; if something is expected to be there, you then make a measurement and enter it into whatever little data set you have for such things. While some may have data sets for the amount of hair on a persons head they don't do it for rocks because rocks don't normally have hair, and even if there was some hair like thing on it, it would still not be hair.

So a measure of the color or length or thickness of human hair on a human head would be ZERO, if they are bald, and that is a measure a number or a color if that is what you are observing.

For a rock it would be a null set since there is no valid measure or observation for hair on a rock.

I know that is way too much for a kookburger atheist to grasp, but I post it anyway for the lurkers out there.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Why is it now that we have developed rational inquiry we hear only a deafening silence from a god who once supposedly engaged regularly in human affairs? Why does god not simply speak to us or appear before us as he supposedly used to? Why are we the losers in the dice roll of time? If a god places such a high value on us worshipping and believing then why not simply make its existence obvious to us?
.

Because God only speaks to those who are willing to hear, dumbass liar.

And only people that are willing to see your invisible friend can see him right? Fucking retard.

Lol, yes, it is a well established phenomena that people very often cannot see the things that they look for if they already believe that the thing searched for cannot be there.

idiot.

 

[PratchettFan]

Why is it now that we have developed rational inquiry we hear only a deafening silence from a god who once supposedly engaged regularly in human affairs? Why does god not simply speak to us or appear before us as he supposedly used to? Why are we the losers in the dice roll of time? If a god places such a high value on us worshipping and believing then why not simply make its existence obvious to us?

If one accepts the prevailing scientific understanding of the development of the universe, yet also believes in one of the major religions, then presumably a god sat idle for 13.7 billion years – waiting as the stars, galaxies and planets formed. Then it watched with complete and utter indifference as modern Homo Sapians evolved, struggled and died for a further 150,000 years. Finally, a few thousand years ago, this god suddenly decided to reveal itself to several people in the most primitive, illiterate and remote portions of humanity in a completely unverifiable way – and then simply disappeared.

I have no idea. Now.... let me know when you have objective evidence to share. Until then, you're just spouting religious beliefs and treating it as if you knew something.

All we are saying is that we don't believe in your god or any god(s).

No religion required to not believe something.

Is bald a hair color?

Yes, I know that is what you are saying. To use another's analogy, saying you are flapping your arms and flying does not mean you're doing it. If an Atheist is one who lacks beliefs in God, then you have repeatedly demonstrated here that you are not an Atheist. Or, and this is where I am on the issue, what you are saying is bullshit.

Mind you, I am not inferring you are lying. I think you actually believe what you are saying. But that merely means you have fully bought into the dogma.

 

[PratchettFan]

Because God only speaks to those who are willing to hear, dumbass liar.

And only people that are willing to see your invisible friend can see him right? Fucking retard.

Lol, yes, it is a well established phenomena that people very often cannot see the things that they look for if they already believe that the thing searched for cannot be there.

idiot.

I agree. It most often manifests itself by being able to see in others what they simply cannot see in themselves. There was once a great teacher who talked a lot about that. He admonished his followers to look to the plank in their own eye. But heck, why listen to a kookburger like that.

 

[alang1216]

Did Paul Ever Meet Jesus?

Q. We first wanted to thank you for your website on the Bible and Jesus Christ. We have a question about the Apostle Paul that we hoped you may be able to answer. I was at a Sunday school class and asked the question, did Paul ever meet Jesus? The answer I got from the group was no. On the road to Damascus Paul met Jesus after he had ascended into heaven. Was Jesus’s appearance physical or spiritual? Please give us some insight.

A. There’s no indication from Scripture that Paul and Jesus ever met before the Damascus Road incident. And Acts 9:4-7 doesn’t specify whether the Lord’s encounter with Paul was physical or not. It only says Paul saw a bright light and heard a voice. The men with him heard a loud sound but didn’t see anything. In subsequent re-tellings of the encounter Paul never indicated that He had actually seen Jesus at that time.
from: Did Paul Ever Meet Jesus? | GracethrufaithGracethrufaith

lol, all they are saying is that there is no Biblical passage for Paul meeting Jesus, but absence of evidence is not evidence of absence and every schoolboy knows, or used to know until you libtards fucked it all up, that little rule.

There is no biblical passage that St Mark was born of a woman either, and yet people assume it for obvious reasons, so absence of Biblical verse is not proof of anything at all.

If everything is possible why don't you believe in everything?

If it is not in scripture just put it there if you wish it to be. I'm sure if you were a scribe 1,000 years ago you'd just fill in the blanks in scripture with what you know/suspect/wish/ (pick one) to be the case, especially if it reinforced you theological bent. You'll be happy to know that that is exactly what happened to scripture over the centuries.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Did Paul Ever Meet Jesus?

Q. We first wanted to thank you for your website on the Bible and Jesus Christ. We have a question about the Apostle Paul that we hoped you may be able to answer. I was at a Sunday school class and asked the question, did Paul ever meet Jesus? The answer I got from the group was no. On the road to Damascus Paul met Jesus after he had ascended into heaven. Was Jesus’s appearance physical or spiritual? Please give us some insight.

A. There’s no indication from Scripture that Paul and Jesus ever met before the Damascus Road incident. And Acts 9:4-7 doesn’t specify whether the Lord’s encounter with Paul was physical or not. It only says Paul saw a bright light and heard a voice. The men with him heard a loud sound but didn’t see anything. In subsequent re-tellings of the encounter Paul never indicated that He had actually seen Jesus at that time.
from: Did Paul Ever Meet Jesus? | GracethrufaithGracethrufaith

lol, all they are saying is that there is no Biblical passage for Paul meeting Jesus, but absence of evidence is not evidence of absence and every schoolboy knows, or used to know until you libtards fucked it all up, that little rule.

There is no biblical passage that St Mark was born of a woman either, and yet people assume it for obvious reasons, so absence of Biblical verse is not proof of anything at all.

If everything is possible why don't you believe in everything?

lol, you are serious. Because some things are disproven outside of Biblical sources.

If it is not in scripture just put it there if you wish it to be. I'm sure if you were a scribe 1,000 years ago you'd just fill in the blanks in scripture with what you know/suspect/wish/ (pick one) to be the case, especially if it reinforced you theological bent.

No, I am not an atheist who would just lie and make shit up. I know that for an atheist liar like you that is just too far outside the box to grasp, but I toss the thought out there on the chance someday it make sink through that lead lined casket you call a skull.

You'll be happy to know that that is exactly what happened to scripture over the centuries.

Prove it, you lying bitch.

 

[alang1216]

lol, all they are saying is that there is no Biblical passage for Paul meeting Jesus, but absence of evidence is not evidence of absence and every schoolboy knows, or used to know until you libtards fucked it all up, that little rule.
There is no biblical passage that St Mark was born of a woman either, and yet people assume it for obvious reasons, so absence of Biblical verse is not proof of anything at all.

If everything is possible why don't you believe in everything?

lol, you are serious. Because some things are disproven outside of Biblical sources.

Really? Only math and alcohol have proofs that I know of. What is proven? Not just in your experience, common knowledge, or has a preponderance of evidence but actually proven.

You'll be happy to know that that is exactly what happened to scripture over the centuries.

Prove it, you lying bitch.

Many critical scholars have noticed the fourth gospel has signs of insertions, additions and reshuffling, suggesting its writing followed a long process:

"It is today freely accepted that the fourth Gospel underwent a complex development before it reached its final form." (John's gospel, from original to canonical. Successive additions & relocations (reshuffling), with evidence for a progressive composition)

Professor Bart D. Ehrman's [ame="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0060859512?ie=UTF8&tag=religdebat-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=0060859512"]Misquoting Jesus[/ame]:

Top 10 Verses that were not Originally in the New Testament

1 John 5:7- There are three that bear witness in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one.
One of the more famous stories in the Bible is the "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone..." incident. The next two verses that Ehrman lists are from the same encounter (from which I quote at length in the block quote).

John 8:7 - Let the one who is without sin among you be the first to cast a stone at her.

John 8:11 - Neither do I condemn you. Go and sin no more.

John 8:1-11 (NRSV) while Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. Early in the morning he came again to the temple. All the people came to him and he sat down and began to teach them. The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery; and making her stand before all of them, they said to him, ‘Teacher, this woman was caught in the very act of committing adultery. Now in the law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?’ They said this to test him, so that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, ‘Let anyone among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.’ And once again he bent down and wrote on the ground. When they heard it, they went away, one by one, beginning with the elders; and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him. Jesus straightened up and said to her, ‘Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?’ She said, ‘No one, sir.’ And Jesus said, ‘Neither do I condemn you. Go your way, and from now on do not sin again.’

I was expecting as a result of my brief article: "Jesus: Unoriginal Moral Thinker" for someone to have mentioned this story from the Gospel of John. So far, I haven't had it claimed as a response to the implicit challenge that Jesus never really taught anything original -- and the things that were original were immoral (for example, a thought-crime is equivalent to the actual crime).

If someone had mentioned the "cast the first stone" as an original moral, I would pointed out two problems. First, this story, which only appears in the Gospel of John, is a later addition. Not only does Ehrman make this point, but so does the Harper Collins Study Bible:

"The most ancient authorities lack 7.53—8.11; other authorities add the passage here or after 7.36 or after 21.25 or after Luke 21.38, with variations of text; some mark the passage as doubtful. Scholars generally agree that this story was not originally part of the Gospel of John." (My emphasis added) - p 1830 [ame="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/006078685X?ie=UTF8&tag=religdebat-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=006078685X"]Harper Collins Study Bible[/ame] (which I recommend if you are serious about having a scholarly Bible for reference).

The second problem is that it's pretty hard to get a moral principle out of the story that is useful: don't punish people unless you have never done anything wrong, ever?

Seriously though, think of how pervasive the story of 'casting the first stone' is in society -- it is one of the most popular stories of the entire Bible -- and it was not in the original Gospel account!

Luke 22:44 - In his anguish Jesus began to pray more earnestly, and his sweat became like great drops of blood falling to the ground.

Luke 22:20 - And in the same way after supper Jesus took the cup and said, "This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood."

The following two verses form the basis of my essay: Ridiculous Ending to the Gospel of Mark. This essay gives an explicit example of how I would steer the conversation if the person I was arguing with did not believe that the ending to the Gospel of Mark was a later addition.

Mark 16:17 - These signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will cast out demons and they will speak with new tongues.

Mark 16:18 - And they will take up snakes in their hands, and if they drink any poison it will not harm them, and they will lay their hands on the sick and they will become well.

The last three verses round out the top ten:

John 5:4 - For an angel of the Lord went down at certain times into the pool and disturbed the waters; and whoever was the first to step in when the water was disturbed was healed of whatever disease he had.

Luke 24:12 - But Peter rose up and ran to the tomb, and stooping down to look in, he saw the linen clothes by themselves. And he went away to his own home, marveling at what had happened.

Luke 24:51 - And when Jesus blessed them he departed from them and he was taken up into heaven.

Mark 16:9-20 has been called a later addition to the Gospel of Mark by most New Testament scholars in the past century. The main reason for doubting the authenticity of the ending is that it does not appear in some of the oldest existing witnesses, and it is reported to be absent from many others in ancient times by early writers of the Church. Moreover, the ending has some stylistic features which also suggest that it came from another hand. The Gospel is obviously incomplete without these verses, and so most scholars believe that the final leaf of the original manuscript was lost, and that the ending which appears in English versions today (verses 9-20) was supplied during the second century. (The Ending of Mark (Mark 16:9-20))

apology accepted

 

[PostmodernProph]

Seriously though, think of how pervasive the story of 'casting the first stone' is in society -- it is one of the most popular stories of the entire Bible -- and it was not in the original Gospel account!

/shrugs.....and its because the passage IS pervasive in society that it was left in even after this was discovered.....leaving a footnote that it doesn't appear in the earliest texts.....but seriously, did you really intend to use the example of us finding a more accurate translation of scripture to attack its accuracy?........

 

[alang1216]

Seriously though, think of how pervasive the story of 'casting the first stone' is in society -- it is one of the most popular stories of the entire Bible -- and it was not in the original Gospel account!

/shrugs.....and its because the passage IS pervasive in society that it was left in even after this was discovered.....leaving a footnote that it doesn't appear in the earliest texts.....but seriously, did you really intend to use the example of us finding a more accurate translation of scripture to attack its accuracy?........

Are you saying that adding text to scripture makes it more accurate? You have a curious definition of accurate. Did God make the decision to add it or was it a man's decision?

Of course this was not the only story that was added to scripture.

Moses’ birth, given in Exodus:

Exodus 2:2-6,10
The woman conceived and bore a son; and...she hid him for three months. And when she could hide him no longer she took for him a basket made of bulrushes; and daubed it with bitumen and pitch; and she put the child in it and placed it among the reeds at the river's brink. Now the daughter of the Pharaoh came down to bathe at the river; and her maiden walked beside the river; she saw the basket among the reeds and sent her maid to fetch it. When she opened it she saw the child...And the child grew...and he became her son; and she named him Moses, for she said "Because I drew him out of water."

There is a legend of the founder of the Semitic dynasty of Akkad, King Sargon, which dates to the third millennium BC and is certainly earlier than the story in Exodus. This legend was found on Neo-Babylonian cuneiform tablets dated to the first millennium BC. This is how the tablets sound like, in English:

Sargon, might King of Akkad, am I. My mother was of mixed blood; I never knew my father...My city is Azupiranu, on the banks of the Euphrates. My mother conceived and she secretly bore me. She put me into a basket of rushes, and sealed its lid with tar. She cast me into the river which did not drown me. The river swept me to Akiki, the drawer of water. Akiki, the drawer of water scooped me up in his pitcher. Akiki, the drawer of water raised me as his son.