Fundies Whip the Easter Bunny

[Dancing David]

Actors Whip Easter Bunny at Church Show
GLASSPORT, Pa. - First, the Passion of the Christ. Now, the torment of the Easter Bunny?

It may not have been as gruesome as Mel Gibson's movie, but many parents and children got upset when a church trying to teach about Jesus' crucifixion performed an Easter show with actors whipping the Easter bunny and breaking eggs.
People who attended Saturday's show at Glassport's memorial stadium quoted performers as saying, "There is no Easter bunny," and described the show as being a demonstration of how Jesus was crucified.
Melissa Salzmann, who brought her 4-year-old son J.T., said the program was inappropriate for young children. "He was crying and asking me why the bunny was being whipped," Salzmann said.
Patty Bickerton, the youth minister at Glassport Assembly of God, said the performance wasn't meant to be offensive. Bickerton portrayed the Easter rabbit and said she tried to act with a tone of irreverence.
"The program was for all ages, not just the kids. We wanted to convey that Easter is not just about the Easter bunny, it is about Jesus Christ," Bickerton said.
Performers broke eggs meant for an Easter egg hunt and also portrayed a drunken man and a self-mutilating woman, said Jennifer Norelli-Burke, another parent who saw the show in Glassport, a community about 10 miles southeast of Pittsburgh.
"It was very disturbing," Norelli-Burke said. "I could not believe what I saw. It wasn't anything I was expecting."
From yahoo news (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=519&ncid=757&e=10&u=/ap/20040408/ap_on_re_us/whipped_easter_bunny

)

[CFLarsen]

In order to preach the Word of God, you not only whip humans, but also animals?

Yeah, that will drive home the message of love...

[triadboy]

I wonder if they will crucify Santa in December?

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by triadboy
I wonder if they will crucify Santa in December? Doesn't really fit. If they crucify the Easter Bunny on Easter, they'd probably have to show the birth of Santa on Christmas.

[MLynn]

Lunacy abounds...

[frisian]

Originally posted by Upchurch
Doesn't really fit. If they crucify the Easter Bunny on Easter, they'd probably have to show the birth of Santa on Christmas.

:D

[wipeout]

People who attended Saturday's show at Glassport's memorial stadium quoted performers as saying, "There is no Easter bunny," and described the show as being a demonstration of how Jesus was crucified.

Hey, that's ironic, as there's every bit as much evidence for the existence of the Easter Bunny as there is of that Jesus guy... ;)

[Zep]

Down here, that would have been seen as fairly silly for a different reason. To us, the "bunny rabbit" is actually an introduced pest. So we have been changing over focus to a cute native animal instead, the bilby. So now we have ... the Easter Bilby!

Heh heh! TRUE! Hey! Stop laughing!!

<img src="http://members.ozemail.com.au/~bilbies/bilbies_not_bunnies.jpg"

[Yahweh]

Hmmm...

The Bible is really quite filled with stories that even children cant believe, much less feign significant moral-usefulness from, I recommend waiting at least the age of 8 when we introduce our children animal torture.

And as we've all been taught, nothing gets the point "GOD LOVES YOU" across faster than animal torture.

Edit: Edited to change "torchure" to correct speeling "torture".

[Wrath of the Swarm]

That's 'torture', dear.

Am I the only one who thinks the child should have been told "the Easter Bunny is being punished for your sins"?

[Yahweh]

Originally posted by Zep
Down here, that would have been seen as fairly silly for a different reason. To us, the "bunny rabbit" is actually an introduced pest. So we have been changing over focus to a cute native animal instead, the bilby. So now we have ... the Easter Bilby!


Bilby?

[Temporal Renegade]

Okay, let me see....

Fundies whip an Easter Bunny--in front of children, no less--tell them it doesn't exist, traumatizing a few of them, and, as skeptics, WE'RE the 'odd' ones...?

[Zep]

Originally posted by Yahweh



Bilby?

For goodness sake, don't tell me Google has clapped out on you?

Yes, THE BILBY. And before any UK person asks, it is NOT fierce, aggressive or poisonous.

http://www.uvm.edu/~jdecher/PHOTOS/Bilby.JPG

[scribble]

Originally posted by Zep
So now we have ... the Easter Bilby!

Heh heh! TRUE! Hey! Stop laughing!!


Dude, I have got to get some of those chocolate bilbys. That's hilarious!! Is there a decent supplier of candy down there that does internet business?

[Roadtoad]

I got a copy of the story from a friend of mine:

Actors Whip Easter Bunny at Church Show
GLASSPORT, Pa. (April 8) - A church trying to teach about the crucifixion of Jesus performed an Easter show with actors whipping the Easter bunny and breaking eggs, upsetting several parents and young children.

People who attended Saturday's performance at Glassport's memorial stadium quoted performers as saying, "There is no Easter bunny,'' and described the show as being a demonstration of how Jesus was crucified.

Melissa Salzmann, who brought her 4-year-old son J.T., said the program was inappropriate for young children. "He was crying and asking me why the bunny was being whipped,'' Salzmann said.

Patty Bickerton, the youth minister at Glassport Assembly of God, said the performance wasn't meant to be offensive. Bickerton portrayed the Easter rabbit and said she tried to act with a tone of irreverence.

"The program was for all ages, not just the kids. We wanted to convey that Easter is not just about the Easter bunny, it is about Jesus Christ,'' Bickerton said.

Performers broke eggs meant for an Easter egg hunt and also portrayed a drunken man and a self-mutilating woman, said Jennifer Norelli-Burke, another parent who saw the show in Glassport, a community about 10 miles southeast of Pittsburgh.

"It was very disturbing,'' Norelli-Burke said. "I could not believe what I saw. It wasn't anything I was expecting.''

You know, there are times when I'm glad I quit going to church. This is one of them.

Imbeciles.

[rachaella]

Maybe I'm odd, but I don't think I'd be taking my 4 yr old to an event meant to teach about a man's brutal and violent death. But adding bunny beating, wow. I'm surprised there was no shooting of baby chicks on stage, another pagan easter symbol.

[Jas]

What would be the point of a self-mutilating woman? I don't get any of this, granted, but the self-mutilating woman is really confusing me.

[Zep]

Originally posted by scribble
Dude, I have got to get some of those chocolate bilbys. That's hilarious!! Is there a decent supplier of candy down there that does internet business?
http://www.easterbilby.com.au/save_bilby/chocolate.asp

The main purveyors are Darrel-Lea and Pink Lady Chocolates. However they both seem to have a limited range of product for overseas shipment - probably due to the cost of packaging hollow chocolate for a "safe" journey.

But if you like, I'd be happy to get some for you and ship them to you. Let me know, OK?

cheers
zep

[Dancing David]

Originally posted by Jas
What would be the point of a self-mutilating woman? I don't get any of this, granted, but the self-mutilating woman is really confusing me.

My guess is that she is some kind of SINNER and if she would just accept Jebus as her lard and safer then she would no longer cut or at least she would cut to the glory of god.

It is very sad.

[c4ts]

I know the Easter Bunny doesn't exist, but that's no excuse to whip him in front of little kids! If there is a Devil, I bet he's with the fundies.

[Checkmite]

This is ridiculous. What harm does the Easter Bunny do? Most Christian kids already know the Christian meaning behind Easter; and if they don't, that's really not the Easter Bunny's, or some candy company's, fault...

The Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, and other holiday symbols are so incredibly benign and fun. They detract from nothing. What is with people?

[c4ts]

Apparently if something isn't Jesus it's a false idol and deserves to be destroyed.

[Virgil]

Originally posted by c4ts
Apparently if something isn't Jesus it's a false idol and deserves to be destroyed.



my feeling is that the nutty christians are not confident enough in their belief to resist anything that questions it.

why are they so opposed to easter bunny, santa claws, evolution? it is because they know their faith is too weak to be tested by them.

Also, christians are a violent bunch. to take their kids to the whipping of a bunny. how do they come up with this stuff. taking the young kids to see the passion. I went to see it and some was too violent for me. many of the little kids were crying.


Virgil

[Blue Monk]

Originally posted by Virgil
my feeling is that the nutty christians are not confident enough in their belief to resist anything that questions it.

I agree.

I've always felt that the fundies who absurdly deny clear scientific reality such as evolution are displaying a profound lack of faith.

The truely faithful should be able to face any reality with their faith intact.

[MLynn]

Originally posted by Virgil




my feeling is that the nutty christians are not confident enough in their belief to resist anything that questions it.

why are they so opposed to easter bunny, santa claws, evolution? it is because they know their faith is too weak to be tested by them.

Also, christians are a violent bunch. to take their kids to the whipping of a bunny. how do they come up with this stuff. taking the young kids to see the passion. I went to see it and some was too violent for me. many of the little kids were crying.


Virgil
I agree with you 100%. I was appalled when I read this story. I'm a Xian and it seems that more and more, people who claim to be Xians are unhappy, hard-hearted and violent. I don't get it. We're supposed to live in peace and charity (love) with our neighbors. BTW, I have not and will not see Mel's movie - ever!

[Tanja]

What bothers me is that many Christians are always protesting about sex and violence on television etc, because of the effect it has on children, but they somehow think that it is totally acceptable to show violence to children if it is about the suffering of Jesus, or some saint or something like that.

In Croatia, where I am from (Catholic country), schools (state schools, we don't have religious schools) are organising for its pupils and students to go and see the Passion of Christ. They think it is good for children to see this particular act of violence. They would probably also think that whipping the easter bunny is an acceptable form of violence.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by Tanja
[What bothers me is that many Christians are always protesting about sex and violence on television etc, because of the effect it has on children, but they somehow think that it is totally acceptable to show violence to children if it is about the suffering of Jesus, or some saint or something like that.

Yes many Christians do that indeed but in this thread we are talking about a sect,"The Assemblies of God" and not all the "Assemblies of God" but the "Assemblies of God" in a village of USA, Glassport ,Pennsylvania.

Not a good example to extract conclusions on how hypocritical some Christian sects are when it comes to violence don't you think?

[wipeout]

I've been surprised to read that not only is there no plausible historical evidence supporting the existence of Jesus but that the historical evidence actually suggests the opposite.

I'd always assumed the New Testament was a mostly fictional account inspired by some historical events, but in reality the lack of supporting evidence in the large number of surviving works by writers of that time strongly suggest there were no historical events at all behind it.

This is why these Christians saying "there is no Easter bunny" is deeply ironic, as there seems to have been nothing Easter-related at all...

[Tanja]

Originally posted by Cleopatra


Yes many Christians do that indeed but in this thread we are talking about a sect,"The Assemblies of God" and not all the "Assemblies of God" but the "Assemblies of God" in a village of USA, Glassport ,Pennsylvania.

Not a good example to extract conclusions on how hypocritical some Christian sects are when it comes to violence don't you think?

I am not quite sure what you mean. I compared the behaviour of a Christian church/sect that I am not very familiar with, to the behaviour of Catholic church, which I am very famililar with. I am not saying that all Christians behave like that, but I am pointing to an example where a Catholic society and Catholic church condone religion related violence.

[Zep]

I don't see what all the fuss is about these tiny few silly people. The majority of Christians will celebrate their Easter peacefully with family and friends and fellowship, and will share chocolate and other edible treats of all sorts as a symbol of that celebration. Non-Christians will be doing much the same but without the church attendances, i.e. happily and peacefully. So why should we let a bunch of sad whingy whiny losers spoil the occasion for everyone?

Just tell them to get out of our lives and get one of their own. No-one needs them.

[Jundar]

Originally posted by wipeout
I'd always assumed the New Testament was a mostly fictional account inspired by some historical events, but in reality the lack of supporting evidence in the large number of surviving works by writers of that time strongly suggest there were no historical events at all behind it.

Oh, come on. Jerusalem was on the very border of attention in these times; almost nobody really cared about what happened to some prophet or religious leader in Palestine who didn´t really pose a threat to the Roman Empire.
And actually, there is a historical remark about the crucifixion:

Josephus, Antiquitates XX 200 (Jewish Antiquities)
(Ananus) called together the High Court for judgement and called before it the brother Jesus, who is called Christ, Jacob by name and also some others, and accused them for being trespassers before the Law and sentenced them to be stoned.

So there is a least some small historical evidence of a person named Jesus, called the Christ. It may not be much, but Josephus is a well-known historian and less prone to Christian propaganda, being a Jew himself :) This of course doesn´t prove anything, I just wanted to point out that it´s not complete bogus...

[Temporal Renegade]

Hey Kids! It's time for...Fundie The Clown!

HOO HOO, kiddies! How are all my little Fundies and Fundiettes doing today? Hi, and welcome to the Fundie The Clown Show, where we tell you what you should and should not believe!

Today, we're going to talk about one of the most Holiest of days, Easter! You know, Easter was when Our Lord Jesus H. 'Tap Dancing' Christ was resurrected from the dead. And, for some reason, we celebrate it by giving out candy from an 'Easter Bunny'. Now, I don't know about you, but I really do NOT see where this bunny comes from! In fact, let's take care of that right now!

Here we see a Bunny. Looks like the so-called 'Easter Bunny', huh? Brightly coloured vest, basket of coloured eggs (also something I just don't get!), the works. Let's jump him!
Hah! Got you, Bunny!
Now that he's all tied up, let's talk about what Season this is... Good! Why yes, it is Spring, but I'm talking about the Other one.
Give up? Well, to quote another Bunny--Bugs--Why, it's BASEBALL season! Let's show Mr.I'm-The-Easter-Bunny-who's-more-important-than-JESUS how Fundies play this game!!

WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM!
WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM!
WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM!
WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM!

Whew, that's tiring! But, the point got across, didn't it kids? Don't believe in a mythical Bunny, believe in a mythical MAN!

Now, let's follow our Ringmaster, Mr. Smyte D. Heethens in a lockstep march to church, where you WILL accept Jesus, OR ELSE!!!

See ya in a few months, when we slap down another cultural icon, and play
Reindeer Skeet-Shoot!!
Bye!!!

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by Tanja


I am not quite sure what you mean. I compared the behaviour of a Christian church/sect that I am not very familiar with, to the behaviour of Catholic church, which I am very famililar with. I disagree with the comparison. First of all how do you compare two things you are not familiar with? Can we compare the Catholic church with the sect of David Koresh for example? I am not saying that all Christians behave like that, but I am pointing to an example where a Catholic society and Catholic church condone religion related violence. I don't think that this is what they do. I mean look at the western countries. We fight terrorism but we broadcast pictures of horror from terrorist attacks. The Church encourages people to see "The Passion" in order to pass directly the message of the Gospels. A picture worths a thousand words.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by Temporal Renegade
Hey Kids! It's time for...Fundie The Clown!

HOO HOO, kiddies! How are all my little Fundies and Fundiettes doing today? Hi, and welcome to the Fundie The Clown Show, where we tell you what you should and should not believe!

Today, we're going to talk about one of the most Holiest of days, Easter! You know, Easter was when Our Lord Jesus H. 'Tap Dancing' Christ was resurrected from the dead. And, for some reason, we celebrate it by giving out candy from an 'Easter Bunny'. Now, I don't know about you, but I really do NOT see where this bunny comes from! In fact, let's take care of that right now!

Here we see a Bunny. Looks like the so-called 'Easter Bunny', huh? Brightly coloured vest, basket of coloured eggs (also something I just don't get!), the works. Let's jump him!
Hah! Got you, Bunny!
Now that he's all tied up, let's talk about what Season this is... Good! Why yes, it is Spring, but I'm talking about the Other one.
Give up? Well, to quote another Bunny--Bugs--Why, it's BASEBALL season! Let's show Mr.I'm-The-Easter-Bunny-who's-more-important-than-JESUS how Fundies play this game!!

WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM!
WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM!
WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM!
WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM! WHAM!

Whew, that's tiring! But, the point got across, didn't it kids? Don't believe in a mythical Bunny, believe in a mythical MAN!

Now, let's follow our Ringmaster, Mr. Smyte D. Heethens in a lockstep march to church, where you WILL accept Jesus, OR ELSE!!!

See ya in a few months, when we slap down another cultural icon, and play
Reindeer Skeet-Shoot!!
Bye!!!


Very nice. :clap: :clap: :clap:

You must be a very bright person, we are so glad and lucky we have you in this forum. :)

[Temporal Renegade]

Originally posted by Cleopatra



Very nice. :clap: :clap: :clap:

You must be a very bright person, we are so glad and lucky we have you in this forum. :)

Aw, shucks....:)
I call it like I see it.

And, thank you very much!:D

[Checkmite]

Originally posted by Virgil

my feeling is that the nutty christians are not confident enough in their belief to resist anything that questions it.

why are they so opposed to easter bunny, santa claws, evolution? it is because they know their faith is too weak to be tested by them.

Not at all - it's even worse than that. Evolution may directly contradict a couple of specific biblical precepts (involving creation, that's about it), sure.

But the Easter Bunny and Santa...these have nothing to do with the debate. They say nothing for or against Christianity. They do not contradict any biblical precepts. Kids who sit on Santa's lap are not told "Jesus isn't real". These cultural icons don't question or even speak to Christian belief. It's just empty, pointless hatred.

[wipeout]

Originally posted by Jundar
Oh, come on. Jerusalem was on the very border of attention in these times; almost nobody really cared about what happened to some prophet or religious leader in Palestine who didn´t really pose a threat to the Roman Empire. And actually, there is a historical remark about the crucifixion:

Josephus, Antiquitates XX 200 (Jewish Antiquities)
(Ananus) called together the High Court for judgement and called before it the brother Jesus, who is called Christ, Jacob by name and also some others, and accused them for being trespassers before the Law and sentenced them to be stoned.

So there is a least some small historical evidence of a person named Jesus, called the Christ. It may not be much, but Josephus is a well-known historian and less prone to Christian propaganda, being a Jew himself :) This of course doesn´t prove anything, I just wanted to point out that it´s not complete bogus...

I've read about Josephus, and the brief references to Jesus are regarded as forged additions by more than a few people for various reasons.

This is where I've been reading most of what I know so far:

http://directory.google.com/Top/Society/Religion_and_Spirituality/Opposing_Views/Christianity/Jesus/Falsified_History/

[Virgil]

Originally posted by wipeout


I've read about Josephus, and the brief references to Jesus are regarded as forged additions by more than a few people for various reasons.

This is where I've been reading most of what I know so far:

http://directory.google.com/Top/Society/Religion_and_Spirituality/Opposing_Views/Christianity/Jesus/Falsified_History/


you are right it is wrong to lump all cristians in this category, however ever year you see more and mor articles about this fringe behavior. it is now common to see fundies at halloween having scared sright nights about pagans ,ouija boards and beating of people bobbing for apples because that glorifies the devil.


also, these fundies (in my observation) are as far from Jesus as can be. they are haughty, arrogant, smug , and superior because they are saved. This is exactly what the Jesus of the bible taught them not to be.

as an agnostic/ athesist I feel my life is closer to what Jesus taught than some of these fundies.

I try not to judge people, I help people when they are down, I do anynomus good deeds, and I don't use my cell phone when I drive etc...but I'm going to "hell" because I haven't been saved.

which may not be so bad because if they are right heaven will be filled with fundy jerks....


Virgil

[Jundar]

Originally posted by wipeout


I've read about Josephus, and the brief references to Jesus are regarded as forged additions by more than a few people for various reasons.

As far as I know (I did some studies in Ancient History) this part in ant.20 is rarely questioned (other than a part in ant.18).

Personally I prefer reading scientific books on that subject and not short FAQs on the ´net (no offence, they mostly do for short reference work, but most of them are either prejudiced in one way or another or far from being scientifically correct).

I don´t want to call it a historical proof for the existence of Jesus Christ (prof. messiah), but rather a possible clue to the existence of a man who was called Jesus, believed to be the Christ by those who followed him. No religious proof but a historical subject :)

[kuroyume0161]

Originally posted by wipeout
I've been surprised to read that not only is there no plausible historical evidence supporting the existence of Jesus but that the historical evidence actually suggests the opposite.

I'd always assumed the New Testament was a mostly fictional account inspired by some historical events, but in reality the lack of supporting evidence in the large number of surviving works by writers of that time strongly suggest there were no historical events at all behind it.

This is why these Christians saying "there is no Easter bunny" is deeply ironic, as there seems to have been nothing Easter-related at all...

It is, isn't it?

Here's my question to Xians:

In the Synoptics, just after the "Last Supper" and before the "Betrayal", Jesus goes to the Garden of Gethsemane [sic] with the apostles. There, he prays to, well, himself or his father (the geneology still needs to be worked out there). Whilst praying, his apostles are snoozing. Then Judas appears with some Roman guards and that's the last time that the apostles could have talked to Jesus (since he was arrested and subsequently taken to the Pharisees, Herod, Pontius Pilate, and then crucified).

Okay, who heard what Jesus prayed there and wrote it into the Synoptics?

The obvious answer is "divine revelation" provided this information. Well, that is just as good as "it was made up". Lacking any evidence of 'divine revelation' providing anything tangibly real, its use as a device of providing information is useless. Unless one of the apostles was NOT sleeping (just pretending), then this could be an answer. But, according to the story (eh hem), the apostles all wake up in a stupor (since they had been drinking some fine water-turned-to-wine at the supper), draw their swords (apostles indeed - this begs an entirely new conversation), and one cuts the ear off of a soldier before Jesus calms them down.

The Synoptics read like a story in the third person and this is one point where its historicity is on very shaky ground (actually, vaporous ground). Things are known, done, and said in ways that belie historical account and are more reminiscent of a fictional tale.

I guess whipping the Easter bunny is a way for some Xians to attempt to expel the demons of their muddled origins. We know for certain that xianity absorbed the customs, festivals, and religious ceremonies of many 'pagan' religions - Christmas trees, Easter bunny, Santa Claus, Christmas date, dying god-man mysteries, and so on.

Too late, you're stuck with the bunny. Now, that's ironic. The same religion that spends so much energy trying to convert all of us heathens, nonbelievers, and pagans by professing the reality of their beliefs using unsupported fables has its own gnawling demons to deal with. History has a way of coming back to bite you in the rear, huh?

Kuroyume

[MLynn]

Originally posted by wipeout
I've been surprised to read that not only is there no plausible historical evidence supporting the existence of Jesus but that the historical evidence actually suggests the opposite.

I'd always assumed the New Testament was a mostly fictional account inspired by some historical events, but in reality the lack of supporting evidence in the large number of surviving works by writers of that time strongly suggest there were no historical events at all behind it.
I recently went to an interesting website in my quest for historical evidence of Jesus. I ended up at The Universal Church Triumphant of the Apathetic Agnostic - "We don't know and we don't care" at apatheticagnostic.com/articles. I haven't had a chance to study the article yet, but I found it interesting.

[wipeout]

Originally posted by Jundar


As far as I know (I did some studies in Ancient History) this part in ant.20 is rarely questioned (other than a part in ant.18).

Personally I prefer reading scientific books on that subject and not short FAQs on the ´net (no offence, they mostly do for short reference work, but most of them are either prejudiced in one way or another or far from being scientifically correct).

I've seen short physics FAQ's that are right where my physics textbooks are wrong, so I'm not going to dismiss religious FAQ's right away because it could be equally true of this subject too. :)

A problem with books might be that if someone is interested enough in religion to be writing books about it, they might also be religious enough (or atheistic enough) to be less than entirely honest.

I'm going to see what the best both can come up with and make my own judgement.

As to Josephus, I understand he liked to write in some detail.

Something that occured to me is that it's a bit odd that he goes into such detail on some relatively trivial subjects but throws in a brief bit about the Messiah, almost as an aside...

If he really believed it, that'd be a little odd, which suggests to me that he didn't and the forgery claims are indeed true.

I don´t want to call it a historical proof for the existence of Jesus Christ (prof. messiah), but rather a possible clue to the existence of a man who was called Jesus, believed to be the Christ by those who followed him. No religious proof but a historical subject :)

I thought Jesus was a historical individual but it doesn't bother me if he is or not. :)

I'm just bemused that it might all be made up.

[wipeout]

Originally posted by MLynn

I recently went to an interesting website in my quest for historical evidence of Jesus. I ended up at The Universal Church Triumphant of the Apathetic Agnostic - "We don't know and we don't care" at apatheticagnostic.com/articles. I haven't had a chance to study the article yet, but I found it interesting.

Like the "we don't know and we don't care" bit. :D

Maybe someone could be an "apathist" who believes in "apathism".

Don't know if those are real words. Don't think so. :D

I ended up at the Church of Subgenius myself last week. They have "slack". :D

http://www.subgenius.com/

It seems to be a evangelical-masonic-scientological parody of religion. Fair enough. :p

[wipeout]

Originally posted by kuroyume0161
Here's my question to Xians:

In the Synoptics, just after the "Last Supper" and before the "Betrayal", Jesus goes to the Garden of Gethsemane [sic] with the apostles. There, he prays to, well, himself or his father (the geneology still needs to be worked out there). Whilst praying, his apostles are snoozing. Then Judas appears with some Roman guards and that's the last time that the apostles could have talked to Jesus (since he was arrested and subsequently taken to the Pharisees, Herod, Pontius Pilate, and then crucified).

Okay, who heard what Jesus prayed there and wrote it into the Synoptics?

The obvious answer is "divine revelation" provided this information. Well, that is just as good as "it was made up". Lacking any evidence of 'divine revelation' providing anything tangibly real, its use as a device of providing information is useless. Unless one of the apostles was NOT sleeping (just pretending), then this could be an answer. But, according to the story (eh hem), the apostles all wake up in a stupor (since they had been drinking some fine water-turned-to-wine at the supper), draw their swords (apostles indeed - this begs an entirely new conversation), and one cuts the ear off of a soldier before Jesus calms them down.

The Synoptics read like a story in the third person and this is one point where its historicity is on very shaky ground (actually, vaporous ground). Things are known, done, and said in ways that belie historical account and are more reminiscent of a fictional tale.



You reminded me of what I was reading a few days ago:

Both in the gospels and in Christian history the apostles are represented as illiterate men. But if they spoke Greek, and could also write in Greek, they could not have been just plain fishermen. That they were Greeks, not Jews, and more or less educated, may be safely inferred from the fact that they all write in Greek, and one of them at least seems to be acquainted with the Alexandrian school of philosophy. Jesus was supposedly a Jew, his twelve apostles all Jews -- how is it, then, that the only biographies of him extant are all in Greek? If his fishermen disciples were capable of composition in Greek, they could not have been illiterate men, if they could not have written in Greek -- which was a rare accomplishment for a Jew, according to what Josephus says -- then the gospels were not written by the apostles of Jesus. But the fact that thou these documents are in a language alien both to Jesus and his disciples, they are unsigned and undated, goes to prove, we think, that their editors or authors wished to conceal their identity that they may be taken for the apostles themselves.

Seems some educated Greeks got in on the action. :D

http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/m_m_mangasarian/truth_about_jesus.html

[kuroyume0161]

I enjoyed that, wipeout! Interesting stuff indeed. It seems more and more evidence piles higher and higher in support of notions of the "Q document", Greek cynicism, and Greek mystery cults as the major, possibly spurring influences, that ended up as Christianity, not some Jewish messianic prophet. Hey, wait! Paul was Greek! And many believe his influence on the spreading of Christianity (mainly in Greek areas: Letters to Ephesians, Galatians, Corinthians, Philippians, Colosians, Thessalonians) was tantamount to the establishment of the religion. Very interesting. Christianity didn't seem to spread from Jerusalem or that region as much as it spread from Greece, which had direct connections to Rome.

I haven't read from the link, but will do so soon. Always interested in more information concerning this.

Kuroyume

[Jundar]

In New Testament Studies it is more or less certain that the Gospels weren´t written by the disciples of Jesus who followed him or appeared in the scriptures but by followers who claim to remain in the tradition of these disciples (Marcus was written somewhere about 70, Matthew somewhere around 80, Luke & Deeds of the Apostels 85-90, John & Apocalypse - depending on the scholar :) - somewhere between 90-120).

Greek was the common tongue of the time, and the New Testament is not written in a extremely difficult Greek (apart from Luke & parts of John); it also being the language in which most of the Jewish not living in Palestine were fluent and the fact that the Christian faith first spread in the Jewish communities makes it more or less easy to explain why the few first parts of the New Testament exist (only ) in Greek. There are some parts in Hebrew. By translating some of the more obscure sayings in the Bible from Greek back to Hewbrew it can be made clear that in some cases phrases have a Hebrew origin and were translated to Greek.

One more thing: It is possible to be a critical Christian and use scientific, historical and linguistic methods in analyzing the New Testament and its surroundings. Being a Christian doesn´t automatically mean getting rid of your brain or scientific reason :). A critical verification/falsification method can also be applied by someone who beliefs in certain things. A physicist also has to question his theories when he faced new evidence - it´s more or less the same in scientific theology (which is in certain parts mainly linguistics, history and philosophy)

from kuroyume0161
Christianity didn't seem to spread from Jerusalem or that region as much as it spread from Greece, which had direct connections to Rome.

Well, it wouldn´t have spread if Paul hadn´t managed to link Christian belief and the Greek systems of philosophy and language. Although I´m not very sure about Gnostic influences; it´s quite hard to date the Gnostic parts (most Gnostic documents date later than 150, I recall...)

[wipeout]

Originally posted by Jundar
Greek was the common tongue of the time, and the New Testament is not written in a extremely difficult Greek (apart from Luke & parts of John); it also being the language in which most of the Jewish not living in Palestine were fluent and the fact that the Christian faith first spread in the Jewish communities makes it more or less easy to explain why the few first parts of the New Testament exist (only ) in Greek. There are some parts in Hebrew. By translating some of the more obscure sayings in the Bible from Greek back to Hewbrew it can be made clear that in some cases phrases have a Hebrew origin and were translated to Greek.


Interesting. :) In that quote I gave above, it says Josephus mentions Jews writing in Greek was quite rare.

[evildave]

Originally posted by MLynn

I recently went to an interesting website in my quest for historical evidence of Jesus. I ended up at The Universal Church Triumphant of the Apathetic Agnostic - "We don't know and we don't care" at apatheticagnostic.com/articles. I haven't had a chance to study the article yet, but I found it interesting.

UCTAA? I'm not only aware of it, I'm Ordained there. Got my Master of Nescience to prove it!

It's just 'Apathetic Agnostic'.

[Jundar]

Originally posted by wipeout

Interesting. :) In that quote I gave above, it says Josephus mentions Jews writing in Greek was quite rare.

I don´t know about that part from Josephus; but Greek was the common language of the trade routes; the Roman empire based on the Greek empires and Koine Greek was the lingua franca of these times. One of the more reliable proofs of this is the Septuaginta, a translation of the Jewish Bible most of the non-Palestine Jews who weren´t fluent in Hebrew anymore used throughout the Diaspora (the Jewish communities within the Greek and Roman Empire).

The reason why the Gospel was written and propagated in Greek is quite simple - the early Christians wanted it to spread, and their best chance in doing so was by using the language almost everybody spoke: Greek (and not Latin, whatever Gibson is trying to sell to us). - and the earliest document of Christianity are not the Gospels but the original letters by Paul (who was an educated man and capable of writing Greek)
I don´t think that Jesus spoke Greek - maybe a little bit, but he was surely no man who came from a hellenistic background, his mother tongue being Aramaic (this is more or less certain).

btw, this document (http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/m_m_mangasarian/truth_about_jesus.html) wipeout referred to was written in 1909 and therefor misses most of what has happend in historical and biblical research since then (i.e. Qumran, many old fragments etc.pp.)

[Kopji]

The Assembly of God does this kind of stuff all the time here. This is what they do. 'Mainstream' Christianity is considered unchristian by definition, so don't anyone hurt themselves trying to make sense of this.

I'm not very sympathetic to the parent's complaint. AG is so completely wacky how could they not know what to expect?

The complaint is like tuning into Howard Stern and then whining about all the bad language. Except, well, they can't do that anymore...

[Cleopatra]

Well, Kopji thank you for your post.When I first read this thread I didn't know "The Assembly of God" so I googled. They appeared quite marginal to me but since I didn't know I couldn't really say it.

This is another thread in which the marginal becomes central and it is used to bash Christians in general by naming them all "fundies". I think that you can't even talk about fundies using just this episode.

[triadboy]

Originally posted by Jundar
Well, it wouldn´t have spread if Paul hadn´t managed to link Christian belief and the Greek systems of philosophy and language.

This is the area I'm studying now. What did Paul know of Jesus? The evidence suggests Paul did not peddle Christianity - but Gnosticism. Paul was from Tarsus - hotbed of Mithrasim. (Mithrasim is a dying God-Man religion, as is Gnosticism) Paul is known to gnostics as The Great Gnostic. Paul's Christ was spiritual - a dying God-man mystery for the Jews. His letters sound gnostic. (excluding the later forgeries: Timothy 1 and 2, Titus)


... about Gnostic influences; it´s quite hard to date the Gnostic parts (most Gnostic documents date later than 150, I recall...)

If Paul was spreading a mystery religion of a Jewish dying god-man - then his letters are the earliest gnostic documents.

[triadboy]

Originally posted by Jundar
The reason why the Gospel was written and propagated in Greek is quite simple - the early Christians wanted it to spread...


Here is my point once again - the early spreaders were not Christians. Christianity (as you know it) came much later, culminating with Constantine.

[Jundar]

Originally posted by triadboy

This is the area I'm studying now. What did Paul know of Jesus? The evidence suggests Paul did not peddle Christianity - but Gnosticism. Paul was from Tarsus - hotbed of Mithrasim. (Mithrasim is a dying God-Man religion, as is Gnosticism) Paul is known to gnostics as The Great Gnostic. Paul's Christ was spiritual - a dying God-man mystery for the Jews. His letters sound gnostic. (excluding the later forgeries: Timothy 1 and 2, Titus)

I´m not quite sure about this. Closed Gnostic systems arise much later (or, to be correct, can be only be dated later using documents - and we all depend on some kind of written proof :book: )
Paul also lacks some import parts of the Gnostic systems:

- Christianity is a open "way of salvation" and no "secret knowledge", no "mystic religion" (for this would involve a very small circle of people anxious about guarding the wisdom, for it is part of most known Gnostic sects to consider themselves the "few chosen ones" - this clearly interferes with the Christian idea of missionary activities.)
- There is no difference between the Creator/Demiurge (even John´s "logos" doesn´t count, for logos here is clearly attributed to JHWH) and the Saviour.
- Christianity isn´t using arcane rituals (well, don´t shout me down for this, but in comparison to the rituals used in Mithraism and other Mystic Religions the early Christians were nice, clean, sophisticated, educated people. believe me :) )
- There is no difference between the man Jesus of Nazareth and the Saviour Jesus Christ (every christian denomination nowadays is quite clear about this.)

The "dying god-man" isn´t necessary a proof for gnostic influences, though it may sound like it.

[Jundar]

Originally posted by triadboy

Here is my point once again - the early spreaders were not Christians. Christianity (as you know it) came much later, culminating with Constantine.

I´m sorry, but I can´t follow you here. Do you mean that people speaking/writing Greek were no Christians or do you mean the spreading was not done by Christian followers?

The term "Christians" is documented somewhere in Philo way before 100 (albeit in slightly crippled variation). I´ll look it up, if you want to know for sure.

[wipeout]

Originally posted by Jundar
btw, this document (http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/m_m_mangasarian/truth_about_jesus.html) wipeout referred to was written in 1909 and therefor misses most of what has happend in historical and biblical research since then (i.e. Qumran, many old fragments etc.pp.)

I know. I got half-way through it and wondered why the hell it was talking about Russian Tzar's in the present tense. :D

I really should have said that it was from way back then but I don't think it changes the relevant quote's... er... relevance, does it?

[Temporal Renegade]

Now, don't forget the REAL reason this day is important:

This is the day that Jesus arises from the dead...He removes the stone, exits the cave, and if He sees His shadow, we're in for six more weeks of winter!:D

[wipeout]

LOL! :D

[Virgil]

Originally posted by wipeout
LOL! :D


x2


Virgil

[Yahweh]

:clap: :clap: :clap:

Keep it up, Temporal Renegade :D

[Temporal Renegade]

Originally posted by Yahweh
:clap: :clap: :clap:

Keep it up, Temporal Renegade :D

My wife usually says the same, but she shakes a fist at me when she says it!:)

I'm still wondering if He COULD see His house on Good Friday from where He was...

[Kopji]

This is another thread in which the marginal becomes central and it is used to bash Christians in general by naming them all "fundies". I think that you can't even talk about fundies using just this episode. -Cleo


Well, there's about 50 million AofG's, that's a lot of fundies but I can't say precisely what percent...

Humm, ok, yeah, that's my good Easter deed for today.

I also planted some apple trees and worked on a garden path, but that probably counts as hellbound work.

The AofG are probably the reason behind those arguments for sound-proof rooms in heaven. ;)

[Jundar]

Originally posted by wipeout


I know. I got half-way through it and wondered why the hell it was talking about Russian Tzar's in the present tense. :D
I really should have said that it was from way back then but I don't think it changes the relevant quote's... er... relevance, does it?

I think it does. By denying that the authors of the Gospels were the apostles, Mangasarian declared that the Gospels have not historical or religious worth. But the Gospels still remain an important document, wether they were written by immediate followers of JC or by people who "compiled" a document of faith out of Q, earlier collections, religious tales and saying of JC.
Greek may not have been spoken by fishermen on the lake Genezareth, but it sure was no language alien to the Palestine and Jerusalem population - Hellenism entered this land 200 BC :)

Historical-critical science did come a long way in the last 100 years, btw, not necessarily for enthusiastics or envangelics, but for a better understandings of the development of the Christian faith and the time the belief in JC evolved.

[Please excuse any misspelling, I´m not really used to theological/historical discussions in English...]

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by Kopji
Well, there's about 50 million AofG's, that's a lot of fundies but I can't say precisely what percent... And please don't forget that they are restricted only in one country in the world. Fanaticism is a very human trait, this type of lunacy though seems to be purely American and as far as I know America is not the world, in fact it appeared to the world only 5 minutes ago in terms of human history. So everything, theism and atheism are in a very primitive stage in your country.

Maybe I am talking to myself right now and I shouldn't feel so excluded from this forum when I read those threads. Hmmmm. I will have think about that.

[Silicon]

I'd pay good money to attend a seminar taught by Jundar and Triadboy.

[triadboy]

Originally posted by Jundar
- Christianity is a open "way of salvation" and no "secret knowledge", no "mystic religion" (for this would involve a very small circle of people anxious about guarding the wisdom, for it is part of most known Gnostic sects to consider themselves the "few chosen ones" - this clearly interferes with the Christian idea of missionary activities.)

Mystery religion epiphanies occur in 2 stages. The first is a written story of a dying god-man that the initiate must understand (outer mystery). The second stage is the initiation into the inner mysteries. An eleborate ceremoney where the initiate finally realizes he/she is the dying god-man!

Christianity is built on the first stage. The story was produced - and if Paul is read carefully - many were initiated into the inner mystery. Around this time, Mark wrote his gospel putting Jesus in an historical time and place. The newly historical outer mystery outran its supply lines and the inner mystery was not available to the vast majority.

Christianity is based on half of a mystery ceremony.


- Christianity isn´t using arcane rituals (well, don´t shout me down for this, but in comparison to the rituals used in Mithraism and other Mystic Religions the early Christians were nice, clean, sophisticated, educated people. believe me

Mithric ceremonies are very similar to xian ceremonies - from the costumes to the rituals

[MLynn]

Originally posted by Silicon
I'd pay good money to attend a seminar taught by Jundar and Triadboy.
I agree with Silicon - are you two historians?

[triadboy]

Originally posted by MLynn

I agree with Silicon - are you two historians?

I'm not an historian. I needed a Masters to make Major in the Air Force so I took a correspondance Humanities course. I leaned toward religion courses, because I was fascinated by it. (I always ignored religion before, but tended to believe things were as advertised.)

During my studies, my eyes were opened wide. A load of xian guilt was lifted - it was an epiphany! I wrote my Masters Thesis on Christianity.

That was in 1994 - I have not stopped reading since. Comparative religion, mythology, history, etc. I love Joseph Campbell. This is the stuff I read for fun. I'm reading The Book of J at home - In Search of Zarathustra at work - and I have a new Campbell book in the waiting.

In all my readings - I continued to have a real problem with Paul. (Why doesn't he know anything?) I read The Jesus Mystery recently and it satisfied my Paul problem. I'm still letting it sink in, but I think it works. Paul was a gnostic. Where xians would like you to believe Gnosticism was some terrible offshoot from Christianity - the opposite makes better sense. Xianity is an offshoot from gnosticism.

[LuxFerum]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
Maybe I am talking to myself right now and I shouldn't feel so excluded from this forum when I read those threads. Hmmmm. I will have think about that.
You are not.

[triadboy]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
...this type of lunacy though seems to be purely American...

It all goes back to our idiotic Puritan heritage. When this country was founded, we had a great struggle between the Puritan ideas and the Hermetic ideas. The Hermetic ideas were where the French were - freedom, rights, life.

The stupid Puritanical ideas won. Which is why we freak out every time we see a breast...sex for fun is filthy...anyone different from us is suspicious...etc,etc,etc. It's the sickening feeling that someone - somewhere - is having fun.

[Jundar]

Originally posted by Silicon
I'd pay good money to attend a seminar taught by Jundar and Triadboy.

(blushing) Speaking for myself, you do me too much an honor...

I´m a student of Lutheran theology, I have to admit - but my general knowledge of this area of history is somewhat limited (at least in comparison to triadboy: thanks for your explanations about mystery religion, I´ll have to dig into this when I can find some time :) )

[Dancing David]

Originally posted by triadboy


It all goes back to our idiotic Puritan heritage. When this country was founded, we had a great struggle between the Puritan ideas and the Hermetic ideas. The Hermetic ideas were where the French were - freedom, rights, life.

The stupid Puritanical ideas won. Which is why we freak out every time we see a breast...sex for fun is filthy...anyone different from us is suspicious...etc,etc,etc. It's the sickening feeling that someone - somewhere - is having fun.

That is the American character right there, you have the settlement of Kentuky because of the Whiskey tax and the people who want the right to be a sinner if they want and then you have Massachusettes and other seaboard areas where dancing and whistleing are against the law.

So your average american gets drunk on saturday and regrets going to church with a hangover.

[Sandy M]

Back to the original incident (rather than the language of the Evangelists, etc.),..... while I acknowledge that no one's going to be prosecuted for going out and shooting a wild rabbit and making rabbit stew,.... shouldn't the humane society be stepping in if people are beating up bunnies???? (i.e., gratuitous cruelty rather than making dinner).

[Virgil]

Originally posted by Sandy M
Back to the original incident (rather than the language of the Evangelists, etc.),..... while I acknowledge that no one's going to be prosecuted for going out and shooting a wild rabbit and making rabbit stew,.... shouldn't the humane society be stepping in if people are beating up bunnies???? (i.e., gratuitous cruelty rather than making dinner).


I think it was a man in a bunny suit.


Virgil

[triadboy]

Originally posted by Virgil
I think it was a man in a bunny suit.



Nice gig.

[Sandy M]

"man in a bunny suit"

ahhhhh..... okay, we don't need to call in the SPCA, or rather, not okay (I mean, come on, beating up the Easter Bunny?!?). I guess even fundies didn't want bloody bunnies... and yet they love The Passion of The Christ. Ah well......

[Roadtoad]

Originally posted by Virgil
I think it was a man in a bunny suit.


Virgil

Oh, you mean it was THIS guy? (http://www.scottybunny.com/)

[Wudang]

Did the bunny rise on the third day?