BEEP! BEEP! IT'S ME.

"Begin at the beginning,and go on till you come to the end: then stop." (Lewis Carroll, 1832-1896)

Alice came to a fork in the road. "Which road do I take?" she asked."Where do you want to go?" responded the Cheshire cat."I don't know," Alice answered."Then," said the cat, "it doesn't matter."

"So long as I get somewhere," Alice added as an explanation. "Oh, you're sure to do that," said the Cat, "if you only walk long enough."

"All right," said the Cat; and this time it vanished quite slowly, beginning with the end of the tail, and ending with the grin, which remained some time after the rest of it had gone. "Well! I've often seen a cat without a grin," thought Alice; "but a grin without a cat! It's the most curious thing I ever saw in my life!"

My Photo
Name:
Location: Australia

I am diagonally parked in a parallel universe. Like Arthur Dent from "Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy", if you do not have a Babel Fish in your ear this blog will be completely unintelligible to you and will read something like this: "boggle, google, snoggle, slurp, slurp, dingleberry to the power of 10". Fortunately, those who have had the Babel Fish inserted in their ear, will understood this blog perfectly. If you are familiar with this technology, you will know that the Babel Fish lives on brainwave radiation. It excretes energy in the form of exactly the correct brainwaves needed by its host to understand what was just said; or in this case, what was read. The Babel Fish, thanks to scientific research, reverses the problem defined by its namesake in the Tower of Babel, where a deity was supposedly inspired to confuse the human race by making them unable to understand each other.

"DIFFICILE EST SATURAM NON SCRIBERE"

Beepbeepitsme has been added to The Atheist Blogroll. You can see the blogroll in my sidebar. The Atheist blogroll is a community building service provided free of charge to Atheist bloggers from around the world. If you would like to join, visit Mojoey at Deep Thoughts.

Subscribe to BEEP! BEEP! IT'S ME

Wednesday, October 04, 2006

The God Who Wasn't There

Watch these videos to find out about the god who wasn't there.
~*~

~*~

"The God Who Wasn't There" is an independent film written and directed by Brian Flemming that explores and questions the historicity of Jesus Christ.
~*~
Issues argued in "The God Who Wasn't There" include:
  • Jesus was a fictional character who was never based on a real human, but on previous, older mythic savior figures such as Dionysus and Mithras .
  • Christian leaders are reluctant to teach early church history because it supports Jesus' mythic character.
  • The letters of Saint Paul (which were written prior to the Gospels) did not recount most of what we know as the Jesus story and consider the crucifixion, the resurrection, and the ascension to have happened in a mythic realm .
  • Christian doctrine often contradicts itself.
  • Moderate Christianity makes even less sense than a literal interpretation.

"The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike."- Delos McKown



Link

18 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Interesting, however I have some questions. The apposles were willing to sacrifice their lives for something that they knew was a lie? Further on down the line I could see that happening, just look at Islam. Evidence suggests that such a deception is highly unlikely. People will not knowingly die for a lie. The deciples were not fearless liars who wanted to fool the world. After the crucifiction, the deciples flead in fear for their lives. But as I said' people KNOWING that it was a lie, having been there from the begining and knowing the truth, were willing to die from tortures the likes of which you and I can not immagine? All for a lie? What profit was there for them? None. Christianity was (and is) a religion of peace. They had nothing to gain. In answer to the statement that Jesus was mythological, evidence for Jesus comes from many written documents from the first cuntury, including 39 ancient sources to the New Testament and early churcu leaders. An early statement of faith was probably written 8-20 years after the death and resurection of Jesus. The creed states that Jesus "was buried, and rose again on the third day according to the scriptures." (1 Corinthians 15: 3-8) Most critical historians agree that documents take more than 20 years to become corrupted by mythologial development.

Daniel

5/10/06 1:51 am  
Blogger urizon said...

I always thought Jesus was the guy who lived in the apartment downstairs, back when I used to live on East 115th St.

5/10/06 10:55 am  
Anonymous SH said...

Daniel,

The apposles were willing to sacrifice their lives for something that they knew was a lie?

Think of all the people who were members of various cults and who killed themselves or went to death for what everyone else knew were lies.

evidence for Jesus comes from many written documents from the first cuntury

All we appear to have are hearsay accounts of what supposedly took place. No witness account of what happened exists to the best of my knowledge. No other evidence is also known. So all we have is a set of stories by people who were not there.

Most critical historians agree that documents take more than 20 years to become corrupted by mythologial development.

Can you not think of any examples when rumors and stories began to appear just days, and sometimes hours, after an event took place? We all know that rumors spread like fire, especially in times when it was common to believe in miracles, gods, healings and other supernatural things and ideas. And who are the "most critical historians"? Are they mostly Christian theologians?

5/10/06 1:32 pm  
Blogger beepbeepitsme said...

RE daniel
RE: "Interesting, however I have some questions. The apposles were willing to sacrifice their lives for something that they knew was a lie?"

I have no idea if the apostles literally existed or were part of a previous myth, legend or folklore which were added to jesus's story. The idea of apostles/disciples following a charismatic leader is a common story in the ancient world.

RE: " Further on down the line I could see that happening, just look at Islam. Evidence suggests that such a deception is highly unlikely. People will not knowingly die for a lie."

Well, everyone who has a different relgious belief claims that all the other believers are liars.

And it is probably true that most people will not willingly die for a lie. Some extremist muslims obviously don't think they are dying for lie.

RE: The rest of the stuff about the apostles etc.

As I said, the jesus story could be all an amalgamation of previous myths, folklore and legend.

People love stories of heros. And as an epic of heroism, the jesus story is quite interesting. I just don't believe it is all literally true. No more than I believe that "The Iiad" or the "Odyssey" is all literally true either.

RE: "dying for a religious belief"
I am not the type to die for a religious belief. I don't have a religious belief. But it is obvious that throughout history and the present that people are prepared to die for a religious belief which they consider to be "the truth."

RE: "The creed states that Jesus "was buried, and rose again on the third day according to the scriptures."

I think that literally when people are dead, they stay dead. If they "come back to life", they weren't dead in the first place.

Now if you are talking about a figurative death, like the jesus story is a story about a mthological hero who sacrificed his life to save others. In this context, it is might be meant as a symbol of people sacrificing their lives for the betterment of other people.

Can't say that this would encourage me to go out and throw myself in front of a train to save someone else. But that might depend on who the someone else was.

5/10/06 1:34 pm  
Blogger Daniel said...

'Christianity was (and is) a religion of peace,' says our Anonymous.

Someone should tell George and Tony and John quickly before they destroy some other countries! Cheers.

5/10/06 2:38 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So because the followers of David Koresh and Jim Jones were willing to die for them, I suppose all of their claims must be true as well. Their followers knew them as well as Jesus' followers supposedly knew him, and many of them appeared equally eager to die for what they believed in. All that proves is that Jesus was at least as good as inspiring his cult followers as Koresh and Jones.

5/10/06 10:38 pm  
Blogger beepbeepitsme said...

RE darwin:

Good points, ty :)

6/10/06 12:26 am  
Blogger Bacon Eating Atheist Jew said...

Look at what James Frey almost got away with in 2005. If he was around 2000 years ago, he could have been bigger than Jesus.

6/10/06 2:55 am  
Blogger beepbeepitsme said...

RE AJ:
I haven't blogged about frey yet, I might have to. :)

But I notice that quite a few blogs have.

6/10/06 9:05 am  
Blogger Bacon Eating Atheist Jew said...

I posted about him early in the year.

6/10/06 12:54 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Beepbeep, lets just say for a minute that you are right and that there was no such person as Jesus. I take the liberty of presuming that you believe that when we die we are dead, gone, finished. In that case, me and all other Christians would be living in a happy delusion. However, if the Christians a correct, than all non-Christians will be in for a very rude awakening in hell. So if you’re right, than death is the end. If I’m right, than you’re either going to heaven or hell. If you are right than this world is very bleak and depressing and I’ll just go on with my happy little delusion. If I’m right, than you had better watch out!
Daniel

7/10/06 4:32 am  
Blogger beepbeepitsme said...

RE: anonymous daniel:

RE: "betting on the existence of god" or the idea: "that belief has everything to gain and nothing to lose"

This argument is called Pascal's Wager where Blaise Pascal argued that it is a better "bet" to believe that God exists, because the expected value to be gained from believing that God exists is greater than the expected value resulting from non-belief.

This argument has some major flaws. Some of them are:
1. It assumes that god (if it exists) rewards belief and punishes non-belief.
2. It assumes that the individual has chosen the right god.
3. It assumes that the individual is a member of the right religion or sect of that religion.
4. It requires that any person who is believing in a god to avoid punishment or gain reward would need to believe in all the relgions which consider non-belief punishable.
5. It assumes that god/gods would not know that you are believing in order to avoid punishment or to gain reward which would not be considered true belief.


So, if you claim that we should believe in Christianity just because of the possibility of being punished for not believing in it, then what are you going to say about other religions which also make such a claim?

Based on Pascal's wager, Islam, Christianity and Hinduism cannot all be correct as they do not worship the same god/gods in the same way. So, to escape punishment, for Pascal's Wager to work, you would need to believe in all 3.

Or some unknown non-Christian gods might exist, and punish Christian believers for their failure to believe in them.

Or some powerful entity might decide to punish those who believe in a god while rewarding non-believers.

To avoid punishment from believing in the wrong god, one would need to believe in all of them. This is bound to upset at least one of them,if any of them exist in the first place.

Also, if the belief is basely solely on the expectation of reward and the fear of punishment, instead of other things as well, such as the desire to do good, it is not true belief, which, if any of the gods exist, is bound to piss at least one of them off off as well.

This is apart from a lifetime spent in worshipping which my turn out to be the wrong god, or a non-existent god. Thus a life spent on either a wilful delusion or a lie.

So it is a fallacy that those who believe have nothing to lose and everything to gain.

7/10/06 4:42 pm  
Blogger Krystalline Apostate said...

Daniel:
The apposles were willing to sacrifice their lives for something that they knew was a lie?
In all actuality, your book only has 2 people dying, & not for jeebus.
Stephen in Acts, & James. Both are dubious, inasmuch as their belief had nothing to do w/their 'deaths'.
Go look it up.
There was Justin Martyr. Not an apostle. A whole fad sprang up post-martyrdom, where almost every xtian tried to become martyred.

8/10/06 7:35 am  
Blogger Deacon Barry said...

The apostles were murdered. They didn't have any choice in the matter. They didn't kill themselves for their beliefs like the followers of Jones, Koresh and Applewhite did.
Peter may have gone bravely to his death, by asking to be crucified upside down, but that decision would have been made regardless of whether he believed that Jesus had risen from the dead. He just felt unworthy to be crucified the right way up like Jesus was.
Paul opted for a quick death of beheading by asserting his right as a roman citizen. If he was truly willing to follow in his master's steps you would have expected him to choose crucifixion.
James, the kid brother of Jesus, was killed by a mob. I doubt if he had much time to decide to die willingly or not.
When one is faced with certain death, the only choice one has is how to act in one's final minutes. It's the last chance to make a statement or symbolic gesture that people will remember.

8/10/06 9:55 pm  
Blogger Krystalline Apostate said...

deacon barry:
The apostles were murdered.
Really? Whom, exactly?

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/resurrection/lecture.html
"First, it is based on nothing in the New Testament itself, or on any reliable evidence of any kind. None of the Gospels or Epistles mention anyone dying for their belief in the "physical" resurrection of Jesus. The only martyrdoms recorded in the New Testament are, first, the stoning of Stephen in the Book of Acts. But Stephen was not a witness. He was a later convert. So if he died for anything, he died for hearsay alone. But even in Acts the story has it that he was not killed for what he believed, but for some trumped up false charge, and by a mob, whom he could not have escaped even if he had recanted. So his death does not prove anything in that respect. Moreover, in his last breaths, we are told, he says nothing about dying for any belief in the physical resurrection of Jesus, but mentions only his belief that Jesus was the messiah, and was at that moment in heaven.[17] And then he sees Jesus--yet no one else does, so this was clearly a vision, not a physical appearance, and there is no good reason to believe earlier appearances were any different.

The second and only other "martyr" recorded in Acts is the execution of the Apostle James, but we are not told anything about why he was killed or whether recanting would have saved him, or what he thought he died for.[18] In fact, we have one independent account in the Jewish history of Josephus, of the stoning of a certain "James the brother of Jesus" in 62 A.D., possibly but not necessarily the very same James, and in that account he is stoned for breaking the Jewish law, which recanting would not escape, and in the account of the late 2nd century Christian hagiographer Hegesippus, as reported by Eusebius, he dies not for his belief in a physical resurrection, but, just like Stephen, solely for proclaiming Jesus the messiah, who was at that moment in heaven.[19]

Yet that is the last record of any martyrdom we have until the 2nd century. Then we start to hear about some unnamed Christians burned for arson by Nero in 64 A.D.,[20] but we do not know if any eye-witnesses were included in that group--and even if we did it would not matter, for they were killed on a false charge of arson, not for refusing to deny belief in a physical resurrection. So even if they had recanted, it would not have saved them, and therefore their deaths also do not prove anything, especially since such persecution was so rare and unpredictable in that century. We also do not even know what it was they believed--after all, Stephen and James did not appear to regard the physical resurrection as an essential component of their belief. It is not what they died for. "

Peter may have gone bravely to his death, by asking to be crucified upside down, but that decision would have been made regardless of whether he believed that Jesus had risen from the dead.
http://www.answers.com/topic/saint-peter-1
"According to a tradition recorded or perhaps initiated in the apocryphal Acts of Peter, he was crucified upside down."
Paul opted for a quick death of beheading by asserting his right as a roman citizen. If he was truly willing to follow in his master's steps you would have expected him to choose crucifixion.
But no 1 truly knows, do they?
When one is faced with certain death, the only choice one has is how to act in one's final minutes. It's the last chance to make a statement or symbolic gesture that people will remember.
Like the destruction of the WTC ?
Dying for something don't make it true.

9/10/06 5:18 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just so I am not misunderstood, my comment was just food for thought, nothing else
Daniel

10/10/06 1:46 am  
Blogger beepbeepitsme said...

RE anonymous daniel:

"food for thought" is accepted.

By the way, is that literal food or figurative food? ;)

10/10/06 9:37 am  
Blogger Krystalline Apostate said...

Daniel:
Just so I am not misunderstood, my comment was just food for thought, nothing else
BUUURRRPPP!
Brain still hungry.
That was barely an hors d'oeuvre. Got anything else?

11/10/06 12:20 am  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home