Need Some Positive Assistance

[mwc]

I've mentioned a number of times that I'm self-taught (mainly) since I started on to this site. I've read as many primary sources as I could lay my hands on (in translations) and lots of boring articles like the ones I've posted from.

 

I don't know if one of the key parts of the passion story is really "arcane" though. It's just easier to give it a gloss if you don't investigate all these bits and pieces more fully. But I hope I'm not giving the false impression like some people that this is some "borrowed" set of items like are said of Jesus being Horus and things like that (which I don't accept but put here as an example). The scapegoat concept may not have been strictly Jewish but they did make it their own in practice and purpose (the second author believed I posted believes, against the dominant opinion, that the Jews did invent their own unique variant and I think that's true to an extent...usually coming down to semantics and lack of real information). It was culturally their own and served a purpose that was unique to them. This is essentially true of most cultures and their behaviors but it seems that unless these sorts of disclaimers are explicitly made some people will assume that the Jewish scapegoat was not only similar but identical to the Greek or any other cultures in practice and purpose. This makes it far too simplistic and allows one to gloss in other ways. Anyhow, that's all largely beside the point.

 

mwc

[Kris]

Ok-- so for whatever reason, this issue has surfaced in my mind again, and I am attempting to work my way through it. I have reread all of the great information that both Overcame Faith and MWC came up with, and have a few thoughts of my own.

 

Christians really like to use this story in Yoma 39b to try to prove that Jesus was the ultimate sacrifice and that in not providing a series of miracles to the high priests during the last 40 years of temple service that this was proof of that. This type of thing always causes a deconverter a great deal of stress, because all of a sudden, we are confronted with something that seems to be evidence in support of Jesus being historically verified and supernatural events that are written down in "extra-biblical" sources as well. Scary stuff indeed for someone like me!! This information creeped back into my head when I was thinking through the fact that there might be a historical Jesus, but that there was no proof that he was truly the messiah and that there were problems with the crucifixion story, etc.. For some odd reason, these types of thoughts remind me of what it was like when I was a christian, and the "devil" put thoughts into my head to do something bad, or to doubt god, etc. I get these same types of thoughts--almost daring me to look at christian websites to confuse myself, or that I should doubt my doubt. I honestly think I just like to torture myself!!

 

Anyways, I really got to looking at the jewish perspective of this information and found that they have a totally different take on these "miracles" and the cessation of them which is helpful to me.

 

Some of the biggest points that they make include:

 

1. No one can pin down the date Christ was executed. This would be imperative if you were going to tie the year 30ad to the cessation of these miracles and the death of Christ. If it was done in any other year, there is no link. Trying to pin down the date of the crucifixion is extremely difficult, as even the gospels have conflicting information, we don't know what calendar was being used as the jewish dates always seemed to change, etc. I have looked over numerous christian sites who can "conclusively" come up with the crucifixion occuring in 28ad, 29ad, 30ad, 31ad, 32ad, 33ad, and even years after. Some sites have Christ living into his 50's and then being killed.

 

2. The Talmud also states that these miracles occurred intermittedly at best during the second temple period. According to the Yoma tractate, there was a period of 40 years when the lot always came up "for the lord" and the scarlet ribbon turned white. This was during the time that Simeon the Righteous was the high priest. He was a good guy, and therefore the jewish people did good works-- god was pleased, so he showed his pleasure in performing extra miracles. After Simeon died, the subsequent priests were not as righteous and over time things got really bad. As a result, sometime there would be miracles (the lot coming up for the lord or the crimson ribbon turning white), but other times it would not. Eventually, things got so bad that in the last 40 years there were no miracles at all. On an interesting side note, on one of the christian websites a comment was made that it is mathematically rare to have something come up in a left hand 40 times so this is proof that god was not accepting the Jews sacrifice-- they failed to note that there was another 40 years when god let it come up in the right hand as well. Aside from that, there are two hands-- isn't that 50/50 odds-- that is not mathematically rare in my opinion!!

 

When these christians talk about this event in context with the miracles being related to Jesus' death, they conveniently leave out the fact that there were a number of other years prior to Jesus' birth and even death in which these miracles were not provided by god-- so isn't that indicative that it had nothing to with him, but rather the decline of morality related to the priests? I mean, if this was a sign truly related to Jesus, it would make more sense to say that these miracles always occured right up until the time christ died and then they strangely ceased. That would be hard to ignore. But the fact that this happened many other times and was directly related to the priests actions, it cannot be conclusively tied to one event.

 

The Jewish sites that I visited that address this issue also state that 40 years prior to the temple being destroyed, things got so bad that the Sanheidren pretty much had to give up trying cases as there were so many capital offenses occuring, etc. This was indicitive of how bad things had gotten. Also, the Romans were heavily influencing the Jewish priests, etc. so times were really bad.

 

3. I personally think that the reason that this story was included in the Talmud was to try and explain why the temple was destroyed. Remember, the Talmud, Mishnah, and Gemara were all written a number of years after the temple destruction. Most of the people who may have served in the second temple were no longer alive, and traditions and stories were carried down orally until written down. So, who knows if ANY of these supposed miracles truly took place. These could just be a recount of things that people were told-- ribbons turning from red to white, etc. I also think that there is significance to the year 40 in jewish tradition, so perhaps it was felt that there needed to be 40 solid years of decline to warrant a punishment as awful as having the temple destroyed. It is also possible that the gospel writers were hearing these stories as well, describing why the temple was destroyed and found an opportunity to try and tie their messiah's death in with this information. Who knows? I think that aside from everything already stated by MWC and Overcame Faith, as well as my two cents, there is enough to question this christian premise!

 

What do you all think?

[Overcame Faith]

Kris, I think you hit the ball out of the ballpark with what you wrote. You did a really job of researching and answering your own questions.

 

Just a little aside. Once one comes to the conclusion that there have never been miracles of any type, ever, it clears up a lot of the problems with the Christians and Jews discussing their alleged miraculous events. And when I say miracles, I mean events that defy the natural laws and for which there is sufficient evidence to make that conclusion. With that definition, there have never been any miracles at all. None!!!

 

Try to remember, as you pointed out so well, that all of these alleged events are historical and when people write about them, they will always put their own slants on what happened. That's what both sides of this issue are doing. They are taking events they claim to be miracles, without providing sufficient evidence to support their claims, and then interpreting what allegedly happened in their favor.

[Kris]

Thanks Overcame, it means alot that you understood what I wrote-- I think that sometimes we need to write things down in order to organize our mind, so to speak! I have really been struggling with the topic of the crucifixion here lately for some weird reason-- and unfortunately it weighs me down! Just when I think that I have made all decisions in my head final-- i.e., I don't believe any biblical crap, some random thought will worm its way back in-- saying, but what about this-- or what about that? Isn't it too coincidental that things point this way or that? Uggh.

 

I find that I go through really strong stages, and then really weak stages. When I am weak, I start to doubt all of the progress I have made in understanding how ridiculous the bible truly is. I find myself being sucked into the christian arguements. Unfortunately, when looking into the crucifixion, I saw so many that pointed to a 30ad date, which brought my thoughts back to this post-- and then got my crazy wheels spinning again-- what if this was a sign? What if you are ignoring undisputable truth that Jesus was the true messiah, and on and on!! I ruined a whole weekend re-worrying about all of this. Then I tried to take a step back and look over everything again, and found that there was just as much to prove that this little ditty had nothing to do with Jesus at all than to prove that it did! That helps. It is just so hard when you get confronted with the christian evidence of how they come up with things-- this is one example. Then you read about Daniel and how his dates so accurately match up to correspond and for people like me, we start to get nervous. (Don't worry, I reread your post about why not to fear the endtimes and your explanation of Daniel along with some other sources to better acquaint myself with the confusion in how this book is interpeted.)

 

There is just as much evidence to support a 33ad crucifixion as well, along with a few other dates. The 33ad'ers like to use astrological information as well as trying to pin down specific incidences that occurred in the gospels. It is so confusing.

 

I guess for me, I get nervous when I cannot easily dismiss an arguement that allegedly validates Jesus. For me, I would like to be content to say that there may have been a historical Jesus that might even have been crucified, but that he was not any type of messiah. This gets harder when I see the christian arguements because they try to tie in things that they say are proof-- eclipses, this thread, etc.

 

I forget all of the twisting of things to support their premise-- that is probably my biggest mistake!

[Overcame Faith]

I was thinking about what you wrote in your other post about eclipses and had a thought that I will share with you here.

 

I have a computer program on astronomy like many people do. It's a really cool program. In it, I can go to any spot on earth and see how the sky looks, which planets are out, constellations, stars, and all the rest. But the program does even more. With the particular program I have, I can go back in time up to 6,000 years (some programs go back much further) and see how the stars looked at any given time within the limitations of the program (I can also go forward 6,000 years). The reason the program can do that is because when it all boils down, it is all a matter of mathematics. The program does a series of mathematical equations coupled with the known movement of the earth and accurately calculates everything.

 

The point is that eclipses are also mathematical. That's why we can go back in time and know when there were eclipses seen from anywhere on earth at any time. There is nothing unique or supernatural about eclipses. They are steady and completely predictable. Therefore, eclipses have no connection at all with what happens on earth and with humanity (unless someone does something because there is an eclipse like look up at the moon to see it).

 

Ancient people did not understand eclipses and to them they were some sort of sign from heaven that something important had happened. The mere fact that the bible places such importance on eclipses is, itself, strong evidence of the writer's ignorance of science and what eclipses were. That fact proves that what they say is false because they falsely associate something as mathematically precise as eclipses with what they believe are important events. That, in turn, tells me that the event, itself, is unlikely to have happened.

[Kris]

Yes, I definitely agree with you. I actually really enjoy astronomy, as it is one thing that really makes me NOT believe in all of this bible business-- the universe is so vast and awesome!! I find that if we were to only believe in what the bible has to say, there would not be any need for the other planets or all of the other galaxies in the universe-- what is their purpose? If we are truly all that god is dealing with, etc. then why have all of that? However, if we are just random creation on one planet-- with lots of other planets in other galaxies also sustaining life, it makes sense that we are here, and they are there-- no god needed. I like that thought.

 

I also agree that much of the universe is governed by mathematics-- I am not very good at math-- I barely passed!! But I can respect the laws of mathematics and have found them to be remarkably sound. In fact, mathematics and science have been very much a part of my deconversion. That is why I get so darn mad at myself when Iet stupid stuff like this creep in. Christians liken their explanations like we non-christians use science. Where I fall prey is that I fail to realize that they often use faulty logic that supports their premise. When I am weak, I don't fight back intellectually. And, that is why I find myself posting on this site!!

[NeverAgainV]

..... Unfortunately, some of my deep religous fears came back over the last couple of years, and I found myself obsessing over religion, god and all kinds of nasty stuff. It can be life-ruining!!

............ I would be very happy and VERY RELIEVED if I could just fully reconcile that the bible is not true. And I thought I had, until a few stupid doubts crept back in.

 

Hi Kris, Religious fear is the worst! I was crippled with fear while a fundamentalist bible christian. Thank Reason I got out & have been able to see how untrue the "bible" is.

What helped me were websites like Evilbible.com. Also, you could probably find some good information regarding the contradictions & absurdities in the bible if you google

"bible contradictions" or "bible absurdities". Reading information that was critical of the bible was very helpful.

 

Also, you may want to consider reading Emerson or Robert Ingersoll or others who give reasons why they don't believe in the bible.

There's some horrific stuff in the bible & I for one, can't believe any good & loving god is "bible=god". No way!

I hope you can find peace. Just my .02, but bible religion is the last place where one can find peace.

[Kris]

Never Again-- I wholeheartedly agree. I have never had peace in religion. That is one truth of which I am certain!

[centauri]

It is just so hard when you get confronted with the christian evidence of how they come up with things-- this is one example. Then you read about Daniel and how his dates so accurately match up to correspond and for people like me, we start to get nervous.

Don't be impressed or fooled by Christian claims concerning Dan 9 and Jesus.

Christians butcher and tweak that passage in order to accomplish their goal, which is to make you nervous enough to accept their version of reality.

As you may have already discovered:

Dan 9 concerns two different messiahs, not one.

The starting point of the "amazing accurate dates" is subjective and tweaked to make it conform with the desired outcome.

The number of days in a year is tweaked as well.

The prophecy is split into pieces (with a gap of thousands of years), with no justification for doing so.

 

Christian apologetics cannot even agree with itself on the details of the "fulfillment".

 

In essence, the Christian use of Dan 9 is akin to an archer shooting an arrow into a tree trunk and then going up to it and drawing a white circle around the embedded arrow and claiming it's an amazing bulls-eye.

 

There is just as much evidence to support a 33ad crucifixion as well, along with a few other dates.

That's true.

The dates are all over the map, so for anyone to claim an exact date of death, and then using it in claiming Jesus fulfilled Dan 9 is dishonest to say the least.

 

The 33ad'ers like to use astrological information as well as trying to pin down specific incidences that occurred in the gospels. It is so confusing.

Nor can the year of the birth be established with any exactitude.

It's gets much less confusing once you see through the wall of propaganda that is shamelessly used to sell this religion to the masses.

 

I guess for me, I get nervous when I cannot easily dismiss an arguement that allegedly validates Jesus.

And coming up with a myriad of claims about Jesus is what Christian apologetics is all about.

It's an industry designed to do exactly what it does to you...it tries to overwhelm you into getting nervous when you can't readily see through their dishonesty.

For every person that takes the time to see through the facade, there are hundreds that simply accept the bullsh*t because they feel so overwhelmed by the volume of material that Christian operatives belch forth on a constant basis.

For example, I just heard the Dan 9 crap being promoted as "God's truth" on the radio (one of many Christian radio stations that permeate the AM and FM bands) the other day.

It made all sorts of dishonest claims, subjective interpretations and used this to manipulate the audience into accepting Jesus as their savior.

These are con-artists who will saw the rockers off their grandmother's chair if they think it would help them achieve their goals (which is to control others).

 

For me, I would like to be content to say that there may have been a historical Jesus that might even have been crucified, but that he was not any type of messiah. This gets harder when I see the christian arguements because they try to tie in things that they say are proof-- eclipses, this thread, etc.

 

I forget all of the twisting of things to support their premise-- that is probably my biggest mistake!

It twists prophecies, misquotes the Old Testament, ignores internal contradictions, and relies on special pleading to justify its core doctrine.

Never forget, an aggressive Christian operative will always make the "facts" fit the desired conclusion.

It was true back when the New Testament was written and it's still true today.

Christianity is a giant echo chamber.

Never mistake an echo for an answer.

[Positivist]

I would be very happy and VERY RELIEVED if I could just fully reconcile that the bible is not true. And I thought I had, until a few stupid doubts crept back in.

 

At some point, you are going to have to *decide* what to believe. I cannot emphasize this enough.

 

The issues with which you struggle are the very reason the judge is still out on "whether the Bible is true" or "whether Christianity is true". These matters are not to be decided easily; they are topics of intense debate...for a reason. None of us is all knowing. What we decide is only ever our best guess!

 

At some point, you will have to decide what to believe. You will never have enough information. And remember, you can always change your mind. I'd recommend, if I may be so bold, making a decision to, effective immediately, stop looking at the "what ifs" and stop the research into the perspective you don't want, and just start living as if God does not exist. Mark it on your calendar that in a certain amount of time, you will revisit this decision (say 6 months, or a year) ("To Do Today: Assess life as atheist over past year).

 

The flip-flopping is hard! Maybe try journalling, if you're into that.

 

Keep us posted!

[Positivist]

BTW, I am amazed at how much you all know about this stuff! OMg! I have actually told my husband, "If you ever have questions about the Bible and/or biblical history, ask an atheist at Ex-Christian.net!

[mwc]

I'm going to start by saying I think you're right. Just read the rest of the Talmud if you haven't. It's just full of this same type of "history." You really can't take most of it at face value. It's an interesting read if you find that sort of thing interesting.

 

1. No one can pin down the date Christ was executed. This would be imperative if you were going to tie the year 30ad to the cessation of these miracles and the death of Christ. If it was done in any other year, there is no link. Trying to pin down the date of the crucifixion is extremely difficult, as even the gospels have conflicting information, we don't know what calendar was being used as the jewish dates always seemed to change, etc. I have looked over numerous christian sites who can "conclusively" come up with the crucifixion occuring in 28ad, 29ad, 30ad, 31ad, 32ad, 33ad, and even years after. Some sites have Christ living into his 50's and then being killed.

The synoptics look to agree that one year was how long it took from beginning to end. Neither G.Mark nor G.Matthew set the beginning so without G.Luke there's no way to know when to start the clock. With G.Luke we're supposed to start about 29 CE. G.John sets the total time about 3 years but doesn't set a start date so G.Luke is required here as well. That's why people use 30 CE and 33 CE. They're 1 and 3 years out and, depending on how you calculate things, have the proper Friday to Sunday time frame. But G.John implies a 40+ year age (43 I believe...when he's compared to the temple in age) and there is a patristic author that puts him past 50 and christianity itself starting during the time of Augustus. So if we look at just the gospels, possibly Paul, the time during Pilate is the place to look for something but that's about a 10 year time frame. It's only G.Luke that narrows that down and you've discovered that doesn't really help end the debate.

 

The Jewish sites that I visited that address this issue also state that 40 years prior to the temple being destroyed, things got so bad that the Sanheidren pretty much had to give up trying cases as there were so many capital offenses occuring, etc. This was indicitive of how bad things had gotten. Also, the Romans were heavily influencing the Jewish priests, etc. so times were really bad.

The times before the fall of the temple were pretty bad. The actual time frame would appear to be probably less than 20 years for "bad" and 10 years for "awful." But it depends on who you were and how you measure such things. The Jews were in-fighting for some time and would have likely imploded on their own. As far as we know the Roman governor pushed them over the edge and the war broke out (a tail wagging the dog sort of situation). Before this they had some problems with people wanting to put stuff, or putting stuff, in the temple (not the temple proper but the temple area) and this was no good for them. They also had problems with money being used improperly and some Samaritans putting dead bodies in the temple (which caused them to shut the doors at night afterward and ban Samaritans). These weren't huge issues for the public at large really. Getting stabbed by some jerk while visiting town for a required feast was a huge problem and this sort of Jew on Jew violence was a problem for quite some time.

 

3. I personally think that the reason that this story was included in the Talmud was to try and explain why the temple was destroyed. Remember, the Talmud, Mishnah, and Gemara were all written a number of years after the temple destruction. Most of the people who may have served in the second temple were no longer alive, and traditions and stories were carried down orally until written down. So, who knows if ANY of these supposed miracles truly took place. These could just be a recount of things that people were told-- ribbons turning from red to white, etc. I also think that there is significance to the year 40 in jewish tradition, so perhaps it was felt that there needed to be 40 solid years of decline to warrant a punishment as awful as having the temple destroyed. It is also possible that the gospel writers were hearing these stories as well, describing why the temple was destroyed and found an opportunity to try and tie their messiah's death in with this information. Who knows? I think that aside from everything already stated by MWC and Overcame Faith, as well as my two cents, there is enough to question this christian premise!

I think this is reasonable. It's hard to know why anyone wrote most anything. They don't say. It would have been nice if they would have said "I'm writing this because" but they didn't. You have the 120 years from Simon to the fall of the temple. In ~10 BCE the temple was "finished" (basically dedicated but not actually completed though the temple proper was likely done). Then sometime during Pilate it is "defiled" with shields (~30 CE?). Then it falls ~70 CE. The exact numbers don't matter in a story like that (they want three equal 40's).

 

mwc

[Kris]

MWC-- when did Simon die? This was a confusing bit of information, as there seemed to be a Simon who returned back from Babylon, which would have put him in the 400bce time frame, correct? Or was this a later Simon? Uggh. That is one of the biggest problems with all these ancient writings-- none of them seem to be precise!!

 

Centauri-- thank you so much for the things that you have written. It honestly helps me to remember exactly what I am dealing with when trying to understand how christians work. Sometimes I forget. I agree that things can always be slanted to support a premise-- we see that even today with all of the propaganda that is out in the internet, etc. Even with the access to information that we have, one can not always be certain that they aren't receiving a "tainted history lesson".

 

Positivist-- I do agree with you that flip-flopping is not good. I know that I dont WANT to be a christian in any way-- hell,even when I was a christian, I can honestly say that I did not feel safe, comforted, or nurtured by the lord. I was just trying to avoid the fiery furnace!! I was also terrified of end-times stuff, which kept me in the church much longer than I really should have been. I also got into the church on my own, when I was very young--13 years old-- and used it primarily as a grounding source because my life was out of control at that time (family issues!). As I got older, I actually dreaded church to the point that I hated going, but forced myself to. Even when I spoke in tongues or did the things that others in the church did, I cant say that I ever felt the spirit of the lord. Eventually, I had it when an end-time preacher came to a revival that I went to when I was 20 years old-- I couldn't take it anymore, and quit church that evening. I haven't been back since and I am going on 45!!

 

Unfortunately, I still have had contact with people from my church days who like to try to get me "back to the lord". They have sent scary endtimes literature, or alluded to the things that I have written about in this post as a way to try to convince me that the bible is true and that my soul is in danger-- pretty heady stuff! I have basically cut off all communication with these folks over the last few years because I did not want to hear it--but some their crap got under my skin and caused me to doubt my doubt!! I am a worry wart-- as Overcame Faith can testify to, so I am not able to easily brush aside things. So, if something begins to pick at me, I can get consumed by worry. Then, I spend copious amounts of time trying to disprove whatever it is that is bothering me.

I have really thought about what you said with regard to making a decision and sticking to it and I agree with that. I also agree that it is not good for someone like me to be constantly looking at the view that I don't agree with, as I don't seem to handle it well because I am not one to scoff at it, or easily combat the answer.

 

But, I do believe in evolution, and I do believe that the earth has been around for a really long time. I also believe that religion was created by humans as a way to explain many of their problems, and scriptures (in any of the religions!) get twisted around to try to apply what they say to current times ,etc. I also don't believe in answered prayers, or even the devil roaming around and tempting people. So, I don't know why I get off my atheistic road sometimes. I hate it when I do. I will think about what you have to say about stopping looking at the "what ifs"-- I think that might be a good idea as well!

[♦ ficino ♦]

At some point, you are going to have to *decide* what to believe. I cannot emphasize this enough.

 

The issues with which you struggle are the very reason the judge is still out on "whether the Bible is true" or "whether Christianity is true". These matters are not to be decided easily; they are topics of intense debate...for a reason. None of us is all knowing. What we decide is only ever our best guess!

 

At some point, you will have to decide what to believe. You will never have enough information. And remember, you can always change your mind. I'd recommend, if I may be so bold, making a decision to, effective immediately, stop looking at the "what ifs" and stop the research into the perspective you don't want, and just start living as if God does not exist. Mark it on your calendar that in a certain amount of time, you will revisit this decision (say 6 months, or a year) ("To Do Today: Assess life as atheist over past year).

 

I think this is very good advice for all of us, Postivist, and not just about deconversion! I passed on a version of it to a friend who was excessively worrying about why a professor had not returned an email.

[Positivist]

They have sent scary endtimes literature, or alluded to the things that I have written about in this post as a way to try to convince me that the bible is true and that my soul is in danger-- pretty heady stuff! I have basically cut off all communication with these folks over the last few years because I did not want to hear it--but some their crap got under my skin and caused me to doubt my doubt!! I am a worry wart-- as Overcame Faith can testify to, so I am not able to easily brush aside things. So, if something begins to pick at me, I can get consumed by worry. Then, I spend copious amounts of time trying to disprove whatever it is that is bothering me.

 

Hi Kris! We are quite similar, you and I. I am like "the Princess and the Pea" with misfitting theological pieces. I flipflopped (or, more like, lived in sheer intellectual torment) for several years until my brain almost broke. I worry and cogitate and brood over all kinds of abstract things. I came to realize that evidence will keep coming in to support both sides. People here at Ex-C will say "This means X and Y", and then a fundy will say, "Yes, sort of, but because of W, which modifies X and Y...." and back and forth until you go insane.

 

I think this is one way Christianity makes people crazy: We learn how to play theological tennis on one side of the court, while our common sense plays from the other side of the court. Then, we effectively become able to play both sides of the court and flip flop between the two. Rather than the lifelong atheist, who gets a bizarre serve from the other side and says "What? Are you insane?" (Yes, they are.) But because we have lived both, and can function in both, our brains are forced to schism. At least that's my unofficial unfounded-and-only-experienced take on it. In short, it's crazy-making.

 

As for end times literature, this used to cause me intense fear and panic too. Then I remember that the world is not turning out to be the hell-hole I was raised to believe, and not nearly as scary. This is kindness and goodness, where I did not expect any. Christianity in my view is a cult.

 

Sorry for rambling!! I must say I admire mwc, Overcame, and you for the grasp you have on these matters! I am theologically dwarfed by most people on this board!

 

I wish you peace!

 

I am in a similar age bracket as you

[Zephie]

Hey, I've kind of skimmed this post and I wanted to offer some positive assistance if I may. I studied History in college and I wanted to let you know that despite what the crazy people tell you....the world is the same. People killing each other, raping babies, murder, earthquakes, tsunamis, etc have all been happening since forever. We just hear about it more and more because we are so connected via technology. Please don't let these people back you into a cage with fear-based tactics. I hope this helps.

[Kris]

Positivist-- you pinned me exactly!! I loved how you analyzed what myself, and probably a lot of other have been feeling wth regard to theological tennis! Right about the time I think that i have won the game-- another volley comes through! It is a difficult thing to turn away from religion. That is why sites like this are so important. I am one of those people who bounces on and off this site-- because there are times when I try to make myself deal with life head-on, and I don't want to be confronted with anything that will cause me to question-- even this site at times (particularily when a christian comes on board to argue) because I am not as strong as some of the others on this site. However, I always find myself coming back. And people like MWC and Overcame take the time to talk me off the ledge, so to speak. Losing my faith has been a long road for me--but I plan to stay on it, come hell or high-water (little joke there!). My husband, who is still a christian knows that I have been contemplating athiesm for a while now, and while not happy, he is doing his best to deal with it. I think that it scares him because he doesn't want to become an athiest himself. We don't talk about it much. So, thanks everyone for taking time out of your busy day to post with me-- you will never know how much it is truly appreciated-- Kris

[Positivist]

Right about the time I think that i have won the game-- another volley comes through!

 

And people like MWC and Overcame take the time to talk me off the ledge, so to speak. Losing my faith has been a long road for me--but I plan to stay on it, come hell or high-water (little joke there!).

 

I agree--there are amazing people on this site. I have learned SO MUCH theology here! It's amazing that what we hear from the pulpit is not always (ever?) representative of truth; if there is a truth, it is never the complete truth. There are many people here who have really dug down deep and offer incredible assistance (you know who you are). I'd be lost without them, too!!!

 

Losing your faith is something that takes time. It's not something one can force, I don't think. I'd say you're in the toughest phase at this point--playing tennis on both sides of the court! It almost broke my brain!

 

I wish you peace! And thank you to all those amazing knowledgeable Ex-C'ers who help us ex-xians gain some sanity back! Here's to you!

[mwc]

MWC-- when did Simon die? This was a confusing bit of information, as there seemed to be a Simon who returned back from Babylon, which would have put him in the 400bce time frame, correct? Or was this a later Simon? Uggh. That is one of the biggest problems with all these ancient writings-- none of them seem to be precise!!

Depends which Simon you identify with Simon the Righteous. There are several, over a few hundred years, that could fit the bill. So he could have died back around early Hellenistic times or all the way up until roughly when the temple fell. Take your choice. "Prophecy" is funny that way.

 

mwc

[Kris]

Yes, MWC-- you are absolutely correct that "prophecy" is aligned to slant the information the way the portrayer wants it to be shown. I have seen a lot of that while looking at various information about christianity. Someone on this site brought up a really good point that if the "holy spirit" was actually leading people into the truth by "showing" them certain calculations or truths, he was telling different people different things-- yet they all seem to think that they were right. Now, the christian arguement for this would be that the devil is actually lying to some and providing them false information-- but of course each christian apologist will automatically assume that they are in the right, and the other is being lied to-- so, most likely both are just human beings that think they stumbled onto something unique.