Things I wish I learned in my high school theology classes

[Ariel Yardena Davidson]

It came to my attention that Hemant Mehta (The Friendly Atheist) sometimes lets people do guest articles, and one of those articles for September 29 was by Richard Hagenston, a UMC minister who is more than a little tired of those in the establishment who say "you get to know this BUT NO ONE IS ALLOWED TO HEAR IT FROM THE PULPIT" (yes, screaming is implied there). It does bring up the many and varied questions about the reliability of scripture, as well as author intent. Link is below.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2014/09/29/8-things-your-pastor-will-never-tell-you-about-the-bible/

Granted, I think we all know Jesus was against public prayer, but it's interesting to think that we gloss over his opposition to praying aloud in the synagogue (or our preferred place of worship). At the same time, to have parts of Psalms written so that one was intentionally disagreeing with the other is something I never really noticed and, frankly, wish I noticed to begin with.

Things like this, especially with the pseudepigrapha (-intentionally?- wrong attribution of authorship), really do kick to the curb ANY idea that the Bible was inspired by some deity, instead insisting that this book is nothing more than a collection of human efforts to explain the world, or dictate the rules.

The eighth point, however, is something that I realized that my Catholic school upbringing would never even touch - Paul had a rather huge difference of opinion with, at the likeliest, the original apostles (see 2 Corinthians 11:5 - the most eminent apostles). This, I think, my teachers would have found seriously disconcerting (and is probably why we RARELY ever hear from this particular epistle), as it means that much of the NT was written by or attributed to someone who had major disagreements with the people who actually hung out with the carpenter up until the latter's crucifixion.

So many things that I wasn't taught until I did later research. I wonder what other theological lies I've been given through the pulpit or the classroom?

Frankly, this kind of disagreement (and some of the other things revealed in the article) does enforce my being an atheist and my belief that religions are human institutions that aren't inspired by gods, but rather beliefs about the world.

[AliKat1988]

Did they ever tell you the scholarly consensus that Jesus was not considered god by early Christians? It is rarely mentioned outside academia. It may interest you to research Judaism's differences with Christianity on one person atoning for another, original sin, the cause of evil in this world, the afterlife, faith and satan-very interesting stuff Christians either don't know or disregard.

[Ariel Yardena Davidson]

AliKat1988

Did they ever tell you the scholarly consensus that Jesus was not considered god by early Christians? It is rarely mentioned outside academia. It may interest you to research Judaism's differences with Christianity on one person atoning for another, original sin, the cause of evil in this world, the afterlife, faith and satan-very interesting stuff Christians either don't know or disregard.

in short no

[Mea quidem sententia]

I wish I could find an article about Jesus not being God from the early Christians. However, it would seem to me that if they weren't unitarians, they were binitarians, but did not elevate Jesus to the status of being God, only divine.

[Brothern]

Cecilia Davidson

in short no

As well as there were many Jewish Messianic claimants.

Start here and click through the different pages of claimants: http://www.livius.org/men-mh/messiah/messianic_claimants01.html

Some of the notable ones,

John the Baptist, of which there is a polemic in John against him. The entire Johannine Gospel shows evidence that is has been edited and redacted multiple times by multiple authors. John 1:1-18 shows an example of this, where lines 6-8 and 15 were added into an earlier hymnal text, as a contest against claims (called Mandaeism) of John being the messiah.

Theudas, who highlights a historical error between the Acts of the Apostles and other source documents.

Simon Magus (my favorite) who's was a flying Sumerian magician, who was written about in the Acts of Peter.

Mea quidem sententia

I wish I could find an article about Jesus not being God from the early Christians.

The topic is explored in this book. Ehrman comments upon the beliefs of early Christians.

[AliKat1988]

Cecilia Davidson

AliKat1988

Did they ever tell you the scholarly consensus that Jesus was not considered god by early Christians? It is rarely mentioned outside academia. It may interest you to research Judaism's differences with Christianity on one person atoning for another, original sin, the cause of evil in this world, the afterlife, faith and satan-very interesting stuff Christians either don't know or disregard.

in short no

Here is some stuff on Judaism's stance on these issues-If you were wondering when studying religion I have determined Judaism is probably wrong but seems more internally consistent than Christianity.
Original sin: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/Original_Sin.html
Satan: http://judaism.about.com/od/judaismbasics/a/jewishbeliefsatan.htm
The afterlife-very vague open to speculation FYI: http://www.religionfacts.com/judaism/beliefs/afterlife.htm
One person atoning for another: http://www.whatjewsbelieve.org/explanation1.html
Jewish views on faith vs action:

BBC FAQ on Judaism

It's what you do that counts...
Judaism is a faith of action and Jews believe people should be judged not so much by the intellectual content of their beliefs, but by the way they live their faith - by how much they contribute to the overall holiness of the world.

Cause of evil (debated-some think it is also from god): http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0007_0_07647.html

[Sugarbeary]

AliKat1988

Did they ever tell you the scholarly consensus that Jesus was not considered god by early Christians? It is rarely mentioned outside academia. It may interest you to research Judaism's differences with Christianity on one person atoning for another, original sin, the cause of evil in this world, the afterlife, faith and satan-very interesting stuff Christians either don't know or disregard.

Matthew 16
13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

20 Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ.

That pretty much sums up the worthlessness of this argument.

[Ariel Yardena Davidson]

LoveLoud837

AliKat1988

Did they ever tell you the scholarly consensus that Jesus was not considered god by early Christians? It is rarely mentioned outside academia. It may interest you to research Judaism's differences with Christianity on one person atoning for another, original sin, the cause of evil in this world, the afterlife, faith and satan-very interesting stuff Christians either don't know or disregard.

Matthew 16
13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

20 Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ.

That pretty much sums up the worthlessness of this argument.

Except that what you just quoted is dated around 50 years or so after Jesus died. Which is a long enough time to let views and sayings change in what's essentially a telephone game.

Not to mention, depending on the translation and transcription, we can have changes in words

[Sugarbeary]

Cecilia Davidson

LoveLoud837

AliKat1988

Did they ever tell you the scholarly consensus that Jesus was not considered god by early Christians? It is rarely mentioned outside academia. It may interest you to research Judaism's differences with Christianity on one person atoning for another, original sin, the cause of evil in this world, the afterlife, faith and satan-very interesting stuff Christians either don't know or disregard.

Matthew 16
13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

20 Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ.

That pretty much sums up the worthlessness of this argument.

Except that what you just quoted is dated around 50 years or so after Jesus died. Which is a long enough time to let views and sayings change in what's essentially a telephone game.

Not to mention, depending on the translation and transcription, we can have changes in words

But it happened during Christ's lifetime, and was widely circulated during the beginning of the church age after the great commission. Peter was the one who said it, and Peter had a huge ministry after Christ was dead. You're thinking that after Christ died, nothing happened until these books appeared 50 years later and then 300 or so years later some geezers put some in a book arbitrarily and said if it doesn't fit into this then shutup. Which is very wrong.

[Ariel Yardena Davidson]

What part of "it was written long after Jesus and maybe PETER died" do you not grasp? What's hilarious is that you're reading into my point to reveal your own bias - you are refusing to even CONSIDER that the Gospels could be conflated to fanfiction.

I'm here to have a serious theological discussion and here you are trying to shut me up and say I'm wrong.

Get the hell out. This is a DISCUSSION forum and I've come here asking genuine questions. You offer only insults to my intelligence and curiosity.

[AliKat1988]

LoveLoud837

Cecilia Davidson

LoveLoud837

AliKat1988

Did they ever tell you the scholarly consensus that Jesus was not considered god by early Christians? It is rarely mentioned outside academia. It may interest you to research Judaism's differences with Christianity on one person atoning for another, original sin, the cause of evil in this world, the afterlife, faith and satan-very interesting stuff Christians either don't know or disregard.

Matthew 16
13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

20 Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ.

That pretty much sums up the worthlessness of this argument.

Except that what you just quoted is dated around 50 years or so after Jesus died. Which is a long enough time to let views and sayings change in what's essentially a telephone game.

Not to mention, depending on the translation and transcription, we can have changes in words

But it happened during Christ's lifetime, and was widely circulated during the beginning of the church age after the great commission. Peter was the one who said it, and Peter had a huge ministry after Christ was dead. You're thinking that after Christ died, nothing happened until these books appeared 50 years later and then 300 or so years later some geezers put some in a book arbitrarily and said if it doesn't fit into this then shutup. Which is very wrong.

The gospels were written much later than a couple books definitely attributed to Paul and a couple fragments (mainly just referenced in college religion/theology classes, they are nothing like the dramatic crap) that didn't make it into the bible but are reflective of early Christian thought. I remember reading one of these fragments in a major world religions class and it clearly described Jesus as not being god and more on par with a rabbi, prophet or teacher. They teach this in mainline protestant seminaries. Christianity evolved some between Jesus' death and the writing of the gospels.

[Ariel Yardena Davidson]

AliKat1988

LoveLoud837

Cecilia Davidson

LoveLoud837

AliKat1988

Did they ever tell you the scholarly consensus that Jesus was not considered god by early Christians? It is rarely mentioned outside academia. It may interest you to research Judaism's differences with Christianity on one person atoning for another, original sin, the cause of evil in this world, the afterlife, faith and satan-very interesting stuff Christians either don't know or disregard.

Matthew 16
13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

20 Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ.

That pretty much sums up the worthlessness of this argument.

Except that what you just quoted is dated around 50 years or so after Jesus died. Which is a long enough time to let views and sayings change in what's essentially a telephone game.

Not to mention, depending on the translation and transcription, we can have changes in words

But it happened during Christ's lifetime, and was widely circulated during the beginning of the church age after the great commission. Peter was the one who said it, and Peter had a huge ministry after Christ was dead. You're thinking that after Christ died, nothing happened until these books appeared 50 years later and then 300 or so years later some geezers put some in a book arbitrarily and said if it doesn't fit into this then shutup. Which is very wrong.

The gospels were written much later than a couple books definitely attributed to Paul and a couple fragments (mainly just referenced in college religion/theology classes, they are nothing like the dramatic crap) that didn't make it into the bible but are reflective of early Christian thought. I remember reading one of these fragments in a major world religions class and it clearly described Jesus as not being god and more on par with a rabbi, prophet or teacher. They teach this in mainline protestant seminaries. Christianity evolved some between Jesus' death and the writing of the gospels.

Have to convert the Gentiles somehow, so why not incorporate more Hellenic takes on Jesus?

[Dieu des hommes]

Lies are typically intentional mistruths. In this case many Christians are just simply unaware of these things. As you can imagine a lot of it is ignored at the slightest hint of going against standard Christian doctrine such as the Trinity, the divinity of Jesus, the infallibility of the Bible, et cetera. Even though when you learn about early Christianity it seems that maybe these doctrines really don't seem to accurately reflect the teachings of Jesus. I personally leave this sort of things up to the scholars though, I really don't have an in-depth understanding of Middle Eastern 0 CE history

[Ariel Yardena Davidson]

Dieu des hommes

Lies are typically intentional mistruths. In this case many Christians are just simply unaware of these things. As you can imagine a lot of it is ignored at the slightest hint of going against standard Christian doctrine such as the Trinity, the divinity of Jesus, the infallibility of the Bible, et cetera. Even though when you learn about early Christianity it seems that maybe these doctrines really don't seem to accurately reflect the teachings of Jesus. I personally leave this sort of things up to the scholars though, I really don't have an in-depth understanding of Middle Eastern 0 CE history

i think it can still be called lying through omission.
Alas, not the point. There OBVIOUSLY are points glossed over in favor of keeping people in pews.

[Dieu des hommes]

Cecilia Davidson

Dieu des hommes

Lies are typically intentional mistruths. In this case many Christians are just simply unaware of these things. As you can imagine a lot of it is ignored at the slightest hint of going against standard Christian doctrine such as the Trinity, the divinity of Jesus, the infallibility of the Bible, et cetera. Even though when you learn about early Christianity it seems that maybe these doctrines really don't seem to accurately reflect the teachings of Jesus. I personally leave this sort of things up to the scholars though, I really don't have an in-depth understanding of Middle Eastern 0 CE history

i think it can still be called lying through omission.
Alas, not the point. There OBVIOUSLY are points glossed over in favor of keeping people in pews.

It's only a lie by omission if they're aware of it, which the majority of them really don't seem to be.