Collapse of Christianity worldwide, claims Iran

[Marduk]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2149227/Gospel-Barnabas-cause-Christianitys-collapse-Iran-claims.html

Seized from smugglers, the leather-bound 'gospel' which Iran claims will bring down Christianity and shake world politics

The text, written on animal hide, is thought to be an authentic version of the Gospel of Barnabas, one of Jesus's disciples

'Laughable' Iranian report claims the book states that Jesus was never crucified and He predicted the coming of the Prophet Muhammad

It was discovered by Turkish authorities in 2000 during an anti-smuggling operation

The Vatican has made an official request to view the text

oooooh
:D

[Checkmite]

Barnabas? There was a disciple named Barnabas?

[TimCallahan]

Here's what Wikipedia has to say about the Gospel of Barnabus. Note the hilited area:

This Gospel is considered by the majority of academics, including Christians and some Muslims (such as Abbas el-Akkad) to be late and pseudepigraphical;[1] however, some academics suggest that it may contain some remnants of an earlier apocryphal work (perhaps Gnostic[2], Ebionite[3] or Diatessaronic[4]), redacted to bring it more in line with Islamic doctrine. Some Muslims consider the surviving versions as transmitting a suppressed apostolic original. Some Islamic organizations cite it in support of the Islamic view of Jesus.

The Wiki article also said that the known copies of the Gospel of Barnabus were written in Spanish and Italian and date from the 16th. to 18th. centuries. It will be interesting to see if this copy is written either in Koine Greek or Aramaic and can be accurately dated to an earlier time. It would also be interesting to see if it's written in Arabic and can be dated to the 7th. century CE or later.

[Good Lt]

Isn't this a bit like the Red Sox saying that the Yankees will collapse as a franchise because Babe Ruth was an alcoholic womanizer?

[AvalonXQ]

Barnabas? There was a disciple named Barnabas?

Serious question: Have you ever actually read the Bible?

Barnabas features prominently in Acts as one of Paul's most loyal supporters and traveling companions.

To me, the question is very closely equivalent to someone saying, "Wait, there was a hobbit of the Fellowship named Sam?!"

[Dinwar]

Barnabas? There was a disciple named Barnabas?

Yes. After Judas hung himself Jesus made Barnabas the 13th disciple. Little-known bit of trivia even within the RCC.

It will be interesting to see if this copy is written either in Koine Greek or Aramaic and can be accurately dated to an earlier time. It would also be interesting to see if it's written in Arabic and can be dated to the 7th. century CE or later. Well, it's animal skins (I'm guessing parchment), so C14 dating won't be terribly difficult. Care to place a wager on whether Iran will do it or not? However, unlike the shroud of Turin even C14 dating won't be definitive. Monks made a living, in part, copying texts. So I'm not sure how to verify the authenticity of this work--if it's a copy of the original it'll be younger, but still valid (though proving that will be a pain in the back side).

Given the politicization of the book, my money is on "forgery". Even if it's real, it won't impact anything. Christianity has been pick-and-mix since it formed, the pick-and-mix process being formalized in Nicea. Any number of books were rejected in that council; adding one more wouldn't really make any difference.

[Piscivore]

Redacted.

[Checkmite]

Serious question: Have you ever actually read the Bible?

Barnabas features prominently in Acts as one of Paul's most loyal supporters and traveling companions.

To me, the question is very closely equivalent to someone saying, "Wait, there was a hobbit of the Fellowship named Sam?!"

Yes, I have read it. And yes, I have heard of someone named Barnabas; but I don't recall this person ever interacting with Jesus.

[Dinwar]

Serious question: Have you ever actually read the Bible?

Barnabas features prominently in Acts as one of Paul's most loyal supporters and traveling companions.

To me, the question is very closely equivalent to someone saying, "Wait, there was a hobbit of the Fellowship named Sam?!"

Not all of us study your preferred mythology enough to know all about the minor characters (and even in Acts Barnabas was a minor character, let alone the book as a whole).

To me, this outburst is very closely equivalent to "You mean people don't all devote their lives to studying what *I* think they should?!"

[AvalonXQ]

Yes. After Judas hung himself Jesus made Barnabas the 13th disciple. Little-known bit of trivia even within the RCC.

That's Biblically incorrect.

Barsabas (not Barnabas) and Matthias were the two candidates to replace Judas. Matthias was chosen.

If the RCC claims Barnabas as the 13th Apostle, they're further off the reservation than I thought.

[AvalonXQ]

Yes, I have read it. And yes, I have heard of someone named Barnabas; but I don't recall this person ever interacting with Jesus.

In the Bible, Barnabas only shows up in Acts after the founding of the Church. It's assumed a lot of those guys were following Jesus previously, but there's no Biblical reference to this.

[Dinwar]

That's Biblically incorrect.

Barsabas (not Barnabas) and Matthias were the two candidates to replace Judas. Matthias was chosen.

If the RCC claims Barnabas as the 13th Apostle, they're further off the reservation than I thought.

Thanks for the correction, but can the melodramatic BS, please. It's been more than a decade since I stopped studying the Bible; I may have gotten the official interpretation a minor fact about an obscure character that NO ONE EVER TALKS ABOUT (seriously, try to find ANY discussion of EITHER of these people in a Sunday serman, ANYWHERE, this week) wrong. I thank you for your correction; I was clearly wrong. However, the error was mine. I can't believe it needs to be said and it illustrates how irrational you can be, but as an atheist I do not presume to speak for the RCC.

[Checkmite]

In the Bible, Barnabas only shows up in Acts after the founding of the Church. It's assumed a lot of those guys were following Jesus previously, but there's no Biblical reference to this.

That's what I'm talking about.

[bigred]

Serious question: Have you ever actually read the Bible?
Serious question: are you aware that the term "one of Jesus' disciples" usually is used in reference to one of the 12 apostles, which Barnabas was not? I'm pretty sure that's what he's getting at.

I also agree with the Bosox analogy. Or perhaps McCarthyism is an even better analogy......move along, nothing to see here.

Maybe someone should draw a picture of Muhammed in drag and claim it was dated shortly after he died. :rolleyes:

[TimCallahan]

Barnabas? There was a disciple named Barnabas?

He's first mentioned at the end of acts Acts 4, when it's said that in the Jerusalem church everyone who had property sold it and laid the proceeds of the sale at the feet of Peter and the other disciples. Acts 4:36, 37 say:

Thus Joseph who was surnamed Barnabas (which means son of encouragement) a Levite, a native of Cyprus sold a field which belonged to him and brought the money and laid it at the apostles' feet.

This sets up the story in Acts 5 of Ananias and Sapphira, who are struck dead when they withhold some of the money from the sale of their land.

Later in Acts, Barnabas is a companion of Paul's on some of his travels. So he's not one of the original 12, but rather an important figure in the early church.

ETA: By the time I'd written the above, others had already answered Checkmite's question.

[AvalonXQ]

That's what I'm talking about.

Fair enough. It appears the question came off rude, and so I apologize.

[baron]

Our prophet's better than yours! Our prophet could beat up yours in a fight and he had a better beard, so ner.

[Psi Baba]

If it really had the potential to have the kind of impact that Iran is claiming, why did they sit on it for 12 years?

[TimCallahan]

. . . (snip) . . .

Well, it's animal skins (I'm guessing parchment), so C14 dating won't be terribly difficult. Care to place a wager on whether Iran will do it or not? However, unlike the shroud of Turin even C14 dating won't be definitive. Monks made a living, in part, copying texts. So I'm not sure how to verify the authenticity of this work--if it's a copy of the original it'll be younger, but still valid (though proving that will be a pain in the back side).

Given the politicization of the book, my money is on "forgery". Even if it's real, it won't impact anything. Christianity has been pick-and-mix since it formed, the pick-and-mix process being formalized in Nicea. Any number of books were rejected in that council; adding one more wouldn't really make any difference.

I can see three possibilities:

1) The Iranians won't allow carbon dating.

2) They will allow carbon dating, then denounce it once it shows the book to postdate Muhammad.

3) Carbon dating will show the book to be of second century or later origin, as is the case with many of the alternate gospels.

The closest thing to any importance the Gospel of Barnabas will tell us is that yet another pseudepigraphic document was written a century or so after the time of Jesus in the name of one of the early figures in the Christian movement to give it a spurious authenticity.

[AvalonXQ]

Serious question: are you aware that the term "one of Jesus' disciples" usually is used in reference to one of the 12 apostles, which Barnabas was not?

No, I was not aware of that. Thanks for the clarification.

[Craig B]

Yes, I have read it. And yes, I have heard of someone named Barnabas; but I don't recall this person ever interacting with Jesus. Don't worry about that. The authors of the four canonical gospels almost certainly never "interacted" with Jesus either. Neither did Paul, unless you describe as an interaction with Jesus, a vision of a bright light seen at mid day in Syria some time after Jesus' death, accompanied by the hearing of a voice in the sky.

[Checkmite]

Don't worry about that. The authors of the four canonical gospels almost certainly never "interacted" with Jesus either.


Yes, but they're consistent about who they claim were disciples; a list which is not compatible evidently with the Gospel of Barnabas document.

[AvalonXQ]

Yes, but they're consistent about who they claim were disciples; a list which is not compatible evidently with the Gospel of Barnabas document.

"Disciple" means more than just the Apostles.

Jesus had many, many disciples (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disciple_(Christianity)#Disciples_of_Jesus_of_Naza reth) while he was alive; it wasn't just "the twelve".

I don't think anyone is claiming that Barnabas was one of the Twelve Apostles.

[Checkmite]

The Gospel of Barnabas explicitly claims Barnabas was one of the 12 Apostles; at least according to the Wiki page on the subject.

[Dinwar]

I can see three possibilities:

1) The Iranians won't allow carbon dating.

2) They will allow carbon dating, then denounce it once it shows the book to postdate Muhammad.

3) Carbon dating will show the book to be of second century or later origin, as is the case with many of the alternate gospels.

The closest thing to any importance the Gospel of Barnabas will tell us is that yet another pseudepigraphic document was written a century or so after the time of Jesus in the name of one of the early figures in the Christian movement to give it a spurious authenticity.

To admit another piece of ignorance: What does "pseudopigraphic" mean? I'm not familiar with the term.

Thinking about it, I'm not sure C14 would do any good at all. Like I said, copying books was pretty big business, so this could be a copy from any point in which parchment was used, and it could still be valid. I'd be more interested in seeing what errors the book commits regarding the culture of the time. For example, the Bible mentions all men being called back to their ancestrial home for a census, neither of which ever happened (the Romans farmed out their taxes, so a census of that type was unnecessary, and demanding people go to a place they never lived in because some arbitrary ancestor lived there is simply stupid and not recoreded anywhere except the Bible and altered documents). The errors tell us the world-view of the writer, which can facilitate dating. It takes a lot of effort to put yourself into a foreign mindset, and you can never get it quite right....

[ANTPogo]

To admit another piece of ignorance: What does "pseudopigraphic" mean? I'm not familiar with the term.

When the authorship of a work is falsely attributed to someone who did not, in fact, write it. Believe it or not, Wikipedia even has a giant entry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudepigraphic) about the concept.

Wiki knows all.

[shadron]

Thinking about it, I'm not sure C14 would do any good at all. Like I said, copying books was pretty big business, so this could be a copy from any point in which parchment was used, and it could still be valid. I'd be more interested in seeing what errors the book commits regarding the culture of the time. For example, the Bible mentions all men being called back to their ancestrial home for a census, neither of which ever happened (the Romans farmed out their taxes, so a census of that type was unnecessary, and demanding people go to a place they never lived in because some arbitrary ancestor lived there is simply stupid and not recoreded anywhere except the Bible and altered documents). The errors tell us the world-view of the writer, which can facilitate dating. It takes a lot of effort to put yourself into a foreign mindset, and you can never get it quite right....

Worse than that - monks often scraped off old text on vellum (goatskin) in order to put new text on it. That practice produced what is known as a palimpsest. In the 13th century a monk scraped off an old parchment and copied prayers onto the 174 empty pages. In 1905 the Danish Professor Heiberg found the book of prayers in Constantinople, and identified it as a palimpsest of the Syracusian scientist, Archimedes. According to wikipedia,

The palimpsest holds seven treatises, including the only surviving copy of On Floating Bodies in the original Greek. It is the only known source of The Method of Mechanical Theorems, referred to by Suidas and thought to have been lost forever. Stomachion was also discovered in the palimpsest, with a more complete analysis of the puzzle than had been found in previous texts.

The texts have been brought to light by modern techniques using UV and x-ray sources.

With this in hand you would have a 13th century text with radiocarbon dates running back to 200-300BCE.

[Craig B]

Yes, but they're consistent about who they claim were disciples; a list which is not compatible evidently with the Gospel of Barnabas document. Not quite, but the lists are pretty close and the one significant difference, a Jude for a Thaddeus, can be reconciled. However, the other gospels may simply have copied Mark.

Anyway I agree with the sources who assert that the extant text of Barnabas has been redacted to bring it closer to Muslim ideas. The Iranians seem to be recycling material devised long ago for the very use they're making of it. But if they can establish a fantastically early date for their manuscript, that would be fascinating. I don't believe they have anything so old as to preclude Muslim redaction, however.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Our prophet's better than yours! Our prophet could beat up yours in a fight and he had a better beard, so ner.


Ha. Ha. Mine has hair between his toes. :cool:

[dafydd]

To me, the question is very closely equivalent to someone saying, "Wait, there was a hobbit of the Fellowship named Sam?!"

Why not? The bible and the LOTR are both works of fiction.

[ANTPogo]

Why not? The bible and the LOTR are both works of fiction.

Yes, but the Bible doesn't have Tom Bombadil in it.

Advantage: Bible.

[Dinwar]

Yes, but the Bible doesn't have Tom Bombadil in it.

Advantage: Bible.

Hey! I liked Tom! He'd have sucked in the movies, but in the books he was all right. :P

[blobru]

The Gospel of Barnabas explicitly claims Barnabas was one of the 12 Apostles; at least according to the Wiki page on the subject.

Looks like the wiki's correct (Lonsdale & Ragg trans. 1907 - chapter 14 (http://www.sacred-texts.com/isl/gbar/gbar014.htm)):
...when day was come [Jesus] descended from the mountain, and chose twelve, whom he called apostles, among whom is Judas, who was slain upon the cross. Their names are: Andrew and Peter his brother, fisherman; Barnabas, who wrote this, with Matthew the publican, who sat at the receipt of custom; John and James, sons of Zebedee; Thaddaeus and Judas; Bartholomew and Philip; James, and Judas Iscariot the traitor. To these he always revealed the divine secrets; but the Iscariot Judas he made his dispenser of that which was given in alms, but he stole the tenth part of everything.

Besides Barnabas, this gospel includes both Thaddeus (from Matthew & Mark) and Judas#2 (from Luke) as apostles, while deep-sixing Simon#2 and Thomas (doubting, no relation to Bombadil, at least that I'm aware of). It also makes the claim - which I'd heard before concerning Muslim views on the crucifixion without knowing where it might've come from - that instead of Jesus getting nailed it was Judas#1 (who also gets credit for some questionable bookkeeping re alms dispensation - "9 for them, 1 for me" - which I think the gospel of John alludes to as well).

[yodaluver28]

I can see three possibilities:

1) The Iranians won't allow carbon dating.

The story was done by the Iranian press but Turkey actually has the text and is keeping it in the Ethnography Museum of Ankara so I think the odds of testing are far better than if the Iranians had it, although not 100%.

2) They will allow carbon dating, then denounce it once it shows the book to postdate Muhammad.

Since the Gospel of Barnabas has been known for centuries and this text only seems to have a few lines added, I don't know if they even need to bother denouncing it. Not the Turks anyway. The Iranian press and government don't care about their international credibility so they'll stick to their story no matter what.

3) Carbon dating will show the book to be of second century or later origin, as is the case with many of the alternate gospels.

The closest thing to any importance the Gospel of Barnabas will tell us is that yet another pseudepigraphic document was written a century or so after the time of Jesus in the name of one of the early figures in the Christian movement to give it a spurious authenticity.
I think the most likely scenario, given the added pro-Islamic lines in this version, is that the text is early 7th century and was written to bolster Muhammad's credibility as a prophet.

[yomero]

It's a disappointment that the Gospel of Barnabas doesn't seem to answer 2 important questions submitted by Celia Cruz.

¿Por qué Borondongo le dió a Bernabé? Why did Borondongo hit Barnabas?

¿Por qué Bernabé le pegó a Muchilanga? Why did Barnabas beat Muchilanga?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFPzVMnryCY

[TimCallahan]

I just downloaded the Gospel ofBarnabas and began reading it. It has a nativity combining those of Matthew and Luke, and also contains the story of Jesus turning water into wine at the wedding feast in Cana, a story only found in the Gospel of John. Thus, it is derivative of all the canonical gospels. It is, therefore of second century origin, at earliest. I'll read more of it later to look for other clues.

[Bikewer]

Along the same lines.... Last year I read Ehrman's book on The Gospel Of Judas Escariot.

Ehrman was enlisted as part of the team brought together by National Geographic to determine the work's authenticity. Interesting story, as the volume had been knocking around in various hands for some time, including being stored in a way-not-archival condition for some years.
Still, they pretty well determined that the thing dated to the 2nd century and appeared to be "authentic" at least as to age.
If accepted as true, it too would paint a very different view of Christianity, as it's a Gnostic work.
Judas is the only one of the Apostles that "gets it", who understands Jesus' nature and purpose and willingly enters into the plan to "betray" JC to the Romans so that he can fulfill his plans.
Ehrman maintains there are over 100 "gospels" known to scholars, some only as fragments and some only by mention. They paint wildly differing views of things.

[Dinwar]

Not surprising. The Jews had a number of "saviors" at the time of Christ, and it would be remarkable if a few of them didn't influence someone to write a story or two about them.

I'm not saying that the existence of the Gnostic Gospels proves anything; just that we need to put these works into their proper historical perspective, which may or may not have actually been (whatever later revisions to the story occurred) about the same guy.

[Kopji]

Basij claims that Chapter 41 of the Gospel reads: 'God has hidden himself as Archangel Michael ran them (Adam and Eve) out of heaven, (and) when Adam turned, he noticed that at top of the gateway to heaven, it was written "La elah ela Allah, Mohamad rasool Allah",' meaning Allah is the only God and Mohammad his prophet.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2149227/Gospel-Barnabas-cause-Christianitys-collapse-Iran-claims.html#ixzz1wJwqQYok

Golly, do you think it's real? The Christians must be shaking in their boots.

[arthwollipot]

"Disciple" means more than just the Apostles.

Jesus had many, many disciples (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disciple_(Christianity)#Disciples_of_Jesus_of_Naza reth) while he was alive; it wasn't just "the twelve".

I don't think anyone is claiming that Barnabas was one of the Twelve Apostles.When I was growing up, "disciple" and "apostle" were practically synonyms. Or so I understood.

[angrysoba]

Serious question: Have you ever actually read the Bible?

Barnabas features prominently in Acts as one of Paul's most loyal supporters and traveling companions.

To me, the question is very closely equivalent to someone saying, "Wait, there was a hobbit of the Fellowship named Sam?!"


Sam! Was Tolkien having an off-day? :D

[devnull]

wow, a bunch of crazy crackpots who believe fairy-tales are saying that another bunch of crazy crackpots who believe fairy-tales are wrong, citing some made-up fairy-tale bs?

Say it aint so!

Also, I love how the vatican made an "official" request. Sounds so important until you realise that it amounts to a note sent by a bunch of crazy, child-molesting deviants.

[KevinCanada]

Golly, do you think it's real? The Christians must be shaking in their boots.

You can read the Epistle of Barnabas here http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/barnabas.html
and the gospel of Barnabas here http://www.sacred-texts.com/isl/gbar/index.htm

The gospel does say: Allah is the only God and Mohammad his prophet. But the gospel was written in the 16th century and is a forgery.
The epistle of Barnabas on the other hand dates about to around 100AD I believe.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

When I was growing up, "disciple" and "apostle" were practically synonyms. Or so I understood.

Ah. "When you were growing up." But did not that change after the First Council of Nicaea? :confused:

[Checkmite]

wow, a bunch of crazy crackpots who believe fairy-tales are saying that another bunch of crazy crackpots who believe fairy-tales are wrong, citing some made-up fairy-tale bs?

Say it aint so!


Now you know exactly how I feel when people complain that George Lucas is "ruining Star Wars" or whine that the LOTR movies got ultimately insignificant minutiae "horribly wrong".

[Kopji]

You can read the Epistle of Barnabas here http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/barnabas.html
and the gospel of Barnabas here http://www.sacred-texts.com/isl/gbar/index.htm

The gospel does say: Allah is the only God and Mohammad his prophet. But the gospel was written in the 16th century and is a forgery.
The epistle of Barnabas on the other hand dates about to around 100AD I believe.

Thanks. Actually I read it a long time ago. The Muslims pull this out as a great proof against Christianity from time to time. Must be a slow news day in Iran. I enjoyed the part about the smugglers being found with this, other artifacts, and explosives. I wondered if the treasure included a holy hand grenade...

(the epistle of Barnabas is a completely different thing)

[Lord Emsworth]

You can read the Epistle of Barnabas here http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/barnabas.html
and the gospel of Barnabas here http://www.sacred-texts.com/isl/gbar/index.htm

The gospel does say: Allah is the only God and Mohammad his prophet. But the gospel was written in the 16th century and is a forgery.
The epistle of Barnabas on the other hand dates about to around 100AD I believe.

And let me guess, the Epistle of Barnabas does not in any way, shape or form confirm Islam.

[Lord Emsworth]

The Wiki article also said that the known copies of the Gospel of Barnabus were written in Spanish and Italian and date from the 16th. to 18th. centuries. It will be interesting to see if this copy is written either in Koine Greek or Aramaic and can be accurately dated to an earlier time. It would also be interesting to see if it's written in Arabic and can be dated to the 7th. century CE or later.

According to the article it is "[w]ritten in Syriac, a dialect of Aramaic".

[dafydd]

Yes, but the Bible doesn't have Tom Bombadil in it.

Advantage: Bible.

True, Tom was a bit of a wus.

[dafydd]

wow, a bunch of crazy crackpots who believe fairy-tales are saying that another bunch of crazy crackpots who believe fairy-tales are wrong, citing some made-up fairy-tale bs?

Say it aint so!

Also, I love how the vatican made an "official" request. Sounds so important until you realise that it amounts to a note sent by a bunch of crazy, child-molesting deviants.

As long as Islam collapses too it's fine by me.

[Belz...]

Here's what Wikipedia has to say about the Gospel of Barnabus. Note the hilited area:

This Gospel is considered by the majority of academics, including Christians and some Muslims (such as Abbas el-Akkad) to be late and pseudepigraphical;[1] however, some academics suggest that it may contain some remnants of an earlier apocryphal work (perhaps Gnostic[2], Ebionite[3] or Diatessaronic[4]), redacted to bring it more in line with Islamic doctrine. Some Muslims consider the surviving versions as transmitting a suppressed apostolic original. Some Islamic organizations cite it in support of the Islamic view of Jesus.

The Wiki article also said that the known copies of the Gospel of Barnabus were written in Spanish and Italian and date from the 16th. to 18th. centuries. It will be interesting to see if this copy is written either in Koine Greek or Aramaic and can be accurately dated to an earlier time. It would also be interesting to see if it's written in Arabic and can be dated to the 7th. century CE or later.

I don't get why some people create forgeries to prove their own religion. I mean, don't they actually believe said religion ? Doesn't creating a forgery constitute an indication that you don't really believe ?

[dafydd]

I don't get why some people create forgeries to prove their own religion. I mean, don't they actually believe said religion ? Doesn't creating a forgery constitute an indication that you don't really believe ?

The reasons why believers behave as they do are anybodies guess.

[KevinCanada]

I don't get why some people create forgeries to prove their own religion. I mean, don't they actually believe said religion ? Doesn't creating a forgery constitute an indication that you don't really believe ?

There is actually around 600 biblical books. Over half destroyed never to be found again. out of the remaining 300 half again are fragmented badly and can be hardly read if at all. The last 150 are of use, with only a few dozen in good condition.

Some are outright forgeries, a large number look like made up stories based on the actual scriptures. They read like a adult simplifying the language so kids can comprehend it.

A couple of the forgeries are just plain evil and encouraged racism and suicide.

Who said the people who wrote the forgeries are rational? There was more delusional people back then, than there is today.

[KevinCanada]

The reasons why believers behave as they do are anybodies guess.

I blame indoctrination of the believer at a very young age while their brains are still in development. While this is opinion only. I find that the religious thoughts become almost like a instinct, no fore thought if the religious information is true or not is really considered from it being ingrained.

I do base this on personal experience. As i was indoctrinated into orthodox roman Catholicism. It took until my mid 20's to fully shake off the crap I was taught, meanwhile I had fully left the church by the age of about 8.

All I can describe it as is like, A Big dark cloud, you are under the cloud and the sun is on the other side, no matter how hard you try to "will" the cloud a away to get access to the sunlight you always fail. you are never enough, never good enough always in need of guidance. The religious individuals fail to see is that you do have the ability within to become good enough.

they see this dark cloud, they see you and they project the dark cloud onto you and start the preaching.

[psionl0]

I don't get why some people create forgeries to prove their own religion. I mean, don't they actually believe said religion ? Doesn't creating a forgery constitute an indication that you don't really believe ?Faith is not necessarily a prerequisite for ambition in a religious setting.

[dafydd]

Sam! Was Tolkien having an off-day? :D

He was tired, he'd been Tolkien in his sleep.

[AvalonXQ]

Sam! Was Tolkien having an off-day? :D

Sam is the low-born common-sense everyman character. A mundane name fits.

[Dinwar]

Sam is the low-born common-sense everyman character. A mundane name fits.

ALL the hobbits were low-born. They lived in a rough democracy (or, rather, they don't appear to have much of ANY government, but what few officials they have can come from pretty much any family), so the concept of high-born and low-born broke down. If anything, only Merry (Merriadoc Took) and Frodo (a Took on his mohter's side) could be considered high-born, and then only on one side of the Brandywine; on the other they were just considered weird. And Sam's name wasn't Sam, it was Samwise Gamgee, hardly a common name today. Sam was just a nickname.

This isn't entirely off-topic, either. It speaks to the maliability of any text to fit with the reader's a priori conclusions. There's simply no way that AvalonXQ's interpretation of Sam's character is in line with the story of LOTR; in order to make it fit Avalon has had to ignore the character's name, the society in which he lived, etc. We KNOW who wrote LOTR, why he wrote it, etc., yet people are still capable of distorting things to fit their world-view. Imagine just how badly any 2,000 year old text that's been translated a few times will be distorted.

[tsig]

I don't get why some people create forgeries to prove their own religion. I mean, don't they actually believe said religion ? Doesn't creating a forgery constitute an indication that you don't really believe ?

They want to create more faith in others:

Pious fraud (Latin: pia fraus) is used to describe fraud in religion or medicine. A pious fraud can be counterfeiting a miracle or falsely attributing a sacred text to a biblical figure due to the belief that the "end justifies the means", in this case the end of increasing faith by whatever means available.[citation needed] Thomas Jefferson once referred to a doctor who used placebos as a fraud, even if a pious one.[1]



ETA: or they're bald faced liars, I never thought it mattered either way a lie is still a lie whether faith or greed inspired it.

[ANTPogo]

ALL the hobbits were low-born. They lived in a rough democracy (or, rather, they don't appear to have much of ANY government, but what few officials they have can come from pretty much any family), so the concept of high-born and low-born broke down. If anything, only Merry (Merriadoc Took) and Frodo (a Took on his mohter's side) could be considered high-born, and then only on one side of the Brandywine; on the other they were just considered weird. And Sam's name wasn't Sam, it was Samwise Gamgee, hardly a common name today. Sam was just a nickname.

Bilbo (and thus Frodo, his adopted heir) was a member of the landed gentry, a gentleman to Sam's common laborer.

Merry's surname was Brandybuck, and he was the son and heir of the Master of Buckland, which was an inherited semi-noble title. The Master of Buckland ostensibly had authority over the chunk of the Shire over the Brandywine River, though because there wasn't a whole lot in the way of government in the Shire, it was mostly a nominal thing.

Pippin (Peregrin) was the one surnamed Took. The Tooks were also a semi-noble family with a hereditary rulership title and position - the Thain. Pippin was, like Merry and the Master of Buckland, the son of the current titleholder and heir to that title. The Thain also had nominal authority over a chunk of the Shire (on the same side of the River as Bag End and Hobbiton, not over the River like Buckland), but only exerted real control over Tookland.

[dafydd]

Bilbo (and thus Frodo, his adopted heir) was a member of the landed gentry, a gentleman to Sam's common laborer.

Merry's surname was Brandybuck, and he was the son and heir of the Master of Buckland, which was an inherited semi-noble title. The Master of Buckland ostensibly had authority over the chunk of the Shire over the Brandywine River, though because there wasn't a whole lot in the way of government in the Shire, it was mostly a nominal thing.

Pippin (Peregrin) was the one surnamed Took. The Tooks were also a semi-noble family with a hereditary rulership title and position - the Thain. Pippin was, like Merry and the Master of Buckland, the son of the current titleholder and heir to that title.

Samwise Gamgee was certainly from the lower classes.

[TimCallahan]

When I was growing up, "disciple" and "apostle" were practically synonyms. Or so I understood.

The terms are sufficiently vague and generalized as to be synonyms. However, "disciple" means one who follows a certain teaching and teacher. Ultimately, it derives from the Latin noun disciplina, meaning a teaching or, if you will, a discipline. "Apostle" is of Greek origin, deriving from the propositional prefix apo, meaning "out," plus a verb root stol (I might not have the form right), meaning "to send." Hence. an apostle is one who is "sent out," or dispatched, to preach the word.

In 1 Corinthians 15, in the order of post-Resurrection appearances, Jesus first appears to Peter, then the 12, then to more than 500 brethren, then to all the apostles, then to James, and, finally, to Paul. Thus, 1 Corinthians would seem to imply that Jesus already had people either dispatched or ready to dispatch to preach his word. This runs counter to the gospels and Acts, in which the disciples don't begin to generate the church until after the death of Jesus. That said, in Luke 10 Jesus sends out 70 of his followers, two by two, to preach and cast out demons in his name.

[ANTPogo]

Samwise Gamgee was certainly from the lower classes.

Right. I'm just pointing out that Bilbo, Frodo, Merry, and Pippin were not.

There was a definite class distinction between Sam and Frodo, and a much fuzzier one between Frodo and Merry/Pippin (ie, the Bagginses were a lot closer in social level to the Brandybucks and Tooks than the Gamgees were to the Bagginses).


EDIT: Frodo was one of these (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landed_gentry) (with Bag End as the equivalent of an English Country House (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_country_house), while Sam was merely a common laborer working for the Baggins family (as a gardener for the "estate" of Bag End).

[AvalonXQ]

Thanks, ANTPogo.

The obvious contrast between Sam and the other hobbits as representing different roles in society is well understood in interpreting LOTR.

Dinwar's continued attempt to cut me down personally on any level, whether or not it fits with the facts, is noted.

[Dinwar]

Right. I'm just pointing out that Bilbo, Frodo, Merry, and Pippin were not.

There was a definite class distinction between Sam and Frodo, and a much fuzzier one between Frodo and Merry/Pippin (ie, the Bagginses were a lot closer in social level to the Brandybucks and Tooks than the Gamgees were to the Bagginses).

Fair enough; I got Merry and Pippen's families confused. That said, I still contiend that 1) the differences were minor, to the point where they were negligible (Sam's grandfather was widely respected, for example), and 2) you can't call the Took a noble in the Shire, for the same reason you can't call the Brogans nobles in the USA. And Frodo got his class via Bilbo's wealth.

And they were ALL, with the exception of Frodo, portrayed as bumpkins once they got to Bree, so any class distinction in the Shire was irrelevant. That was why Tolkien had the Shire to begin with. He was re-creating a saga, so his main character had to be nobility--but he had modern sentiments, so his main character had to rise to greatness (as opposed to the Medieval stories, where the main character started great).

[MRC_Hans]

Thanks, ANTPogo.

The obvious contrast between Sam and the other hobbits as representing different roles in society is well understood in interpreting LOTR.

Dinwar's continued attempt to cut me down personally on any level, whether or not it fits with the facts, is noted.

Nice to see that the thread has moved to a really important subject.

Hans

[dafydd]

Fair enough; I got Merry and Pippen's families confused. That said, I still contiend that 1) the differences were minor, to the point where they were negligible (Sam's grandfather was widely respected, for example), and 2) you can't call the Took a noble in the Shire, for the same reason you can't call the Brogans nobles in the USA. And Frodo got his class via Bilbo's wealth.

And they were ALL, with the exception of Frodo, portrayed as bumpkins once they got to Bree, so any class distinction in the Shire was irrelevant. That was why Tolkien had the Shire to begin with. He was re-creating a saga, so his main character had to be nobility--but he had modern sentiments, so his main character had to rise to greatness (as opposed to the Medieval stories, where the main character started great).

Merry and Pippen were portrayed as feckless youths. Sam was the bumpkin.

[Dinwar]

Merry and Pippen were portrayed as feckless youths. Sam was the bumpkin. ~shrug~ You say potato....

My original point still stands, though, even if I'm the guilty party and not Avalon.

[ANTPogo]

1) the differences were minor, to the point where they were negligible (Sam's grandfather was widely respected, for example),

Well, the differences certainly were minor, I'll agree. Tolkien wasn't writing any sort of Marxist dialectic about class struggle or anything!

He did, however, consciously model the Shire and its social structures on an idealized portrait of English country life, a life that most certainly had class distinctions that everyone in England at the time the novels were released would have recognized in the relative social status of Frodo/Bilbo vs. Sam as portrayed in the book.

Sam had to work for a living, doing manual labor for other hobbits. Bilbo lived a life of leisure in his huge manse even before he went on his adventure to Lonely Mountain.

[dafydd]

Nice to see that the thread has moved to a really important subject.

Hans

Yes, and a much more entertaining work of fiction than the bible.

[ANTPogo]

My original point still stands, though, even if I'm the guilty party and not Avalon.

Sorry! I have a tendency to get carried away with these sorts of things...

[dafydd]

Sorry! I have a tendency to get carried away with these sorts of things...

And it saves us from the tediousness of discussing christianity.

[Craig B]

And it saves us from the tediousness of discussing christianity. I'd rather read all the holy books in the world, fraudulent or not, than a single chapter of that Hobbit gibberish.

[Marduk]

I'd rather read all the holy books in the world, fraudulent or not, than a single chapter of that Hobbit gibberish.
NSFCraig B
"In a hole in the ground there lived a hobbit. Not a nasty, dirty, wet hole, filled with the ends of worms and an oozy smell, nor yet a dry, bare, sandy hole with nothing in it to sit down on or to eat: it was a hobbit-hole, and that means comfort.
It had a perfectly round door like a porthole, painted green, with a shiny yellow brass knob in the exact middle. The door opened on to a tube-shaped hall like a tunnel: a very comfortable tunnel without smoke, with panelled walls, and floors tiled and carpeted, provided with polished chairs, and lots and lots of pegs for hats and coats – the hobbit was fond of visitors. The tunnel wound on and on, going fairly but not quite straight into the side of the hill – The Hill, as all the people for many miles round called it – and many little round doors opened out of it, first on one side and then on another. No going upstairs for the hobbit: bedrooms, bathrooms, cellars, pantries (lots of these), wardrobes (he had whole rooms devoted to clothes), kitchens, dining-rooms, all were on the same floor, and indeed on the same passage. The best rooms were all on the left-hand side (going in), for these were the only ones to have windows, deep-set round windows looking over his garden, and meadows beyond, sloping down to the river.
:D

[dafydd]

I'd rather read all the holy books in the world, fraudulent or not, than a single chapter of that Hobbit gibberish.

I have the same attitude towards Terry Pratchett's books.

[Belz...]

They want to create more faith in others:

Pious fraud (Latin: pia fraus) is used to describe fraud in religion or medicine. A pious fraud can be counterfeiting a miracle or falsely attributing a sacred text to a biblical figure due to the belief that the "end justifies the means", in this case the end of increasing faith by whatever means available.[citation needed] Thomas Jefferson once referred to a doctor who used placebos as a fraud, even if a pious one.[1]



ETA: or they're bald faced liars, I never thought it mattered either way a lie is still a lie whether faith or greed inspired it.

"citation needed" hehehe.

The point is, if you're a faithful and you produce such a document, you musn't have much confidence in what you had before.

[I Ratant]

Don't worry about that. The authors of the four canonical gospels almost certainly never "interacted" with Jesus either. Neither did Paul, unless you describe as an interaction with Jesus, a vision of a bright light seen at mid day in Syria some time after Jesus' death, accompanied by the hearing of a voice in the sky.
.
And that untreated compressed fracture of the skull that altered his life 180°!

[I Ratant]

True, Tom was a bit of a wus.
.I recall some doofus dwarf or elf who was ready to crack skulls over a dispute about some gal's attractiveness..
It's 50 or so years since I read it.

[I Ratant]

I don't get why some people create forgeries to prove their own religion. I mean, don't they actually believe said religion ? Doesn't creating a forgery constitute an indication that you don't really believe ?
.
The end justifies the means.
Tv preachers do that all the time.

[I Ratant]

There is actually around 600 biblical books. Over half destroyed never to be found again. out of the remaining 300 half again are fragmented badly and can be hardly read if at all. The last 150 are of use, with only a few dozen in good condition.

Some are outright forgeries, a large number look like made up stories based on the actual scriptures. They read like a adult simplifying the language so kids can comprehend it.

A couple of the forgeries are just plain evil and encouraged racism and suicide.

Who said the people who wrote the forgeries are rational? There was more delusional people back then, than there is today.
.
We have whole countries full of delusional people.
And just the sheer number of people today versus then says we #1!

[Elizabeth I]

When I was growing up, "disciple" and "apostle" were practically synonyms. Or so I understood.

On the other hand, I was explicitly told that Jesus had twelve Apostles, but many disciples. It's kind of like squares and rectangles: All Apostles were disciples, but not all disciples were Apostles. :)

[I Ratant]

Yes, and a much more entertaining work of fiction than the bible.
.
And it spawned an innumerable number of "heroic quest" trilogies, beyond any common sense... hmm.. just like... :)

[AvalonXQ]

On the other hand, I was explicitly told that Jesus had twelve Apostles, but many disciples. It's kind of like squares and rectangles: All Apostles were disciples, but not all disciples were Apostles. :)

Yeah, "the Apostles" usually means "the twelve" (plus Judas' replacement Matthias, and usually Paul).

Of course, even the term "Apostle" is used more widely than this in a few Bible passages.

[jond]

What I want to know is: does this new gospel mention Biff? If not, I call fraud!

[blobru]

No, but the Islamic LOTR does, if it's any consolation (Biffwise Gamgee, Sam's inbred bastard son).

[AvalonXQ]

What I want to know is: does this new gospel mention Biff? If not, I call fraud!

I frickin' love that book! :D

[catsmate1]

I have the same attitude towards Terry Pratchett's books.
Burn the blasphemer!!!!

http://rationalia.com/z/angrymob2.gif

[jond]

I frickin' love that book! :D

Me too! One of the funniest things I've ever read.

[TimCallahan]

I looked at the Gospel of Barnabas again. Going to the end, I found that it has Judas going mad and being crucified in place of Jesus. All the while, Jesus is cought up into heaven. in Chapter 221, Jesus actually tells Brnabas to write the gospel. Note the hilited areas below:

Chapter 221
Jesus turned himself to him who writes, and said: "Barnabas, see that by all means you write my gospel concerning all that has happened through my dwelling in the world. And write in a similar manner that which has befallen Judas, in order that the faithful may be undeceived, and every one may believe the truth." Then answered he who writes: "I will do so, if God wills, O Master; but I do not know what happened to Judas, for I did not see it."
Jesus answered: "Here are John and Peter who saw everything, and they will tell you all that has passed." And then Jesus commanded us to call his faithful disciples [so] that they might see him. So James and John called together the seven disciples with Nicodemus and Joseph, and many others of the seventy-two, and they ate with Jesus.
The third day Jesus said: "Go to the Mount of Olives with my mother, for there I will ascend again to heaven, and you will see who shall bear me up." So they all went there except twenty-five of the seventy-two disciples, who for fear had fled to Damascus. And as they all stood in prayer, at midday Jesus came with a great multitude of angels who were praising God: and the splendour of his face made them greatly afraid and they fell with their faces to the ground. But Jesus lifted them up, comforting them, and saying: "Do not be afraid, I am your master."
And he reproved many who believed that he had died and risen again, saying: "Do you hold me and God for liars? I said to you that God has granted to me to live almost to the end of the world. Truly I say to you, I did not die; it was Judas the traitor. Beware, for Satan will make every effort to deceive you. Be my witnesses in Israel, and throughout the world, of all things that you have heard and seen."
And having said this, he prayed God for the salvation of the faithful, and the conversion of sinners and [then], his prayer ended, he embraced his mother, saying: "Peace be to you, my mother. Rest in God who created you and me." And having said this, he turned to his disciples, saying: "May God's grace and mercy be with you." Then before their eyes the four angels carried him up into heaven.
Chapter 222
After Jesus had departed, the disciples scattered through the different parts of Israel and of the world, and the truth, hated of Satan, was persecuted, as it always is, by falsehood. For certain evil men, pretending to be disciples, preached that Jesus died and rose not again. Others preached that he really died, but rose again. Others preached, and yet preach, that Jesus is the Son of God, among whom is Paul deceived. But we - as much as I have written - we preach to those that fear God, that they may be saved in the last day of God's Judgment. Amen.

This is pretty much second century Gnostic doctrine. I'll look through other parts of the work to see if I can find specific Muslim references.

[I Ratant]

If the subject book is a palimpsest, what was scraped off? :)

[AvalonXQ]

That quote is pretty much straight out of Muslim belief regarding Isa. Didn't actually die on the cross, not actually God's Son, etc.

[dafydd]

That quote is pretty much straight out of Muslim belief regarding Isa. Didn't actually die on the cross, not actually God's Son, etc.

It's your holy book against their holy book. If I was wavering between Islam and Christianity, how do I judge which one is right? One of them must be wrong. Or both wrong.

http://www.muslim.org/islam/deathofj.htm

[I Ratant]

Who taught Adam, that good Jewish boy, how to read Arabic?
Or even Hebrew?

[dafydd]

Who taught Adam, that good Jewish boy, how to read Arabic?
Or even Hebrew?

Never mind that, who taught the snake to speak? A hard thing to do without vocal chords and a larynx.

[Craig B]

It's your holy book against their holy book. If I was wavering between Islam and Christianity, how do I judge which one is right? One of them must be wrong. Or both wrong.

http://www.muslim.org/islam/deathofj.htm As regards Jesus the Koran is not an independent witness. Everything Muhammad knew about Jesus, he learned from Christians. Indeed almost everything in the gospels too, with the possible exceptions of Mark and the Synoptic Sayings Source (Q) has been copied from early Christian myth or previous writings.

[KevinCanada]

I looked at the Gospel of Barnabas again. Going to the end, I found that it has Judas going mad and being crucified in place of Jesus. All the while, Jesus is cought up into heaven. in Chapter 221, Jesus actually tells Brnabas to write the gospel. Note the hilited areas below:

Chapter 221
Jesus turned himself to him who writes, and said: "Barnabas, see that by all means you write my gospel concerning all that has happened through my dwelling in the world. And write in a similar manner that which has befallen Judas, in order that the faithful may be undeceived, and every one may believe the truth." Then answered he who writes: "I will do so, if God wills, O Master; but I do not know what happened to Judas, for I did not see it."
Jesus answered: "Here are John and Peter who saw everything, and they will tell you all that has passed." And then Jesus commanded us to call his faithful disciples [so] that they might see him. So James and John called together the seven disciples with Nicodemus and Joseph, and many others of the seventy-two, and they ate with Jesus.
The third day Jesus said: "Go to the Mount of Olives with my mother, for there I will ascend again to heaven, and you will see who shall bear me up." So they all went there except twenty-five of the seventy-two disciples, who for fear had fled to Damascus. And as they all stood in prayer, at midday Jesus came with a great multitude of angels who were praising God: and the splendour of his face made them greatly afraid and they fell with their faces to the ground. But Jesus lifted them up, comforting them, and saying: "Do not be afraid, I am your master."
And he reproved many who believed that he had died and risen again, saying: "Do you hold me and God for liars? I said to you that God has granted to me to live almost to the end of the world. Truly I say to you, I did not die; it was Judas the traitor. Beware, for Satan will make every effort to deceive you. Be my witnesses in Israel, and throughout the world, of all things that you have heard and seen."
And having said this, he prayed God for the salvation of the faithful, and the conversion of sinners and [then], his prayer ended, he embraced his mother, saying: "Peace be to you, my mother. Rest in God who created you and me." And having said this, he turned to his disciples, saying: "May God's grace and mercy be with you." Then before their eyes the four angels carried him up into heaven.
Chapter 222
After Jesus had departed, the disciples scattered through the different parts of Israel and of the world, and the truth, hated of Satan, was persecuted, as it always is, by falsehood. For certain evil men, pretending to be disciples, preached that Jesus died and rose not again. Others preached that he really died, but rose again. Others preached, and yet preach, that Jesus is the Son of God, among whom is Paul deceived. But we - as much as I have written - we preach to those that fear God, that they may be saved in the last day of God's Judgment. Amen.

This is pretty much second century Gnostic doctrine. I'll look through other parts of the work to see if I can find specific Muslim references.

The Manuscript is officially written in Italian. There is speculation that it was written in Spanish originally then translated to Italian.

Also the Original Gospels were all written in greek, There is a touch of Aramiac in some of the writings. Officially they were all greek, specifically Kione greek.

The espitile of the Barnabas, as I posted earlier in this thread is the 1st century authentic copy. This gospel been dated to around 1600AD. It also contains a very very critical error. chapter 82 states the year of the jubilee is every 100 years. when it is ever 50 years. There was a time a pope made the mistake and pronounced it wrong giving confusion in around 1300AD. The next pope made the correction re-pronouncing it as every 50 years again.

[AvalonXQ]

Never mind that, who taught the snake to speak? A hard thing to do without vocal chords and a larynx.

Maybe Eve was just a parselmouth (http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Parseltongue)?

[Marduk]

Maybe Eve was just a parselmouth (http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Parseltongue)?

you know, using religious texts outside the bible there's a great back story to Adam and Eve

Gods first attempt at a human was the hermaphrodite AdamLillith, who he then seperated into male Adam and Female Lilith, because they were of the same flesh they were equals, so argued all the time, this came to a head when Lillith refused to lie down for Adam and she left the garden at her own request looking for a real man, she eventually settled by the red sea coupled with the Angel Samael and had hundreds of children a day.

Meanwhile back in the garden God created Eve for Adam, who being created from a small part of him was not his equal. And they all lived happily ever after, until it came time for Adam and Eve's children to seek wives

who do you think they married Avalon, in your literal explanation, Bible only
:p

Samael eventually became Satan, but thats another story
:degrin:

[TimCallahan]

The Manuscript is officially written in Italian. There is speculation that it was written in Spanish originally then translated to Italian.

Also the Original Gospels were all written in greek, There is a touch of Aramiac in some of the writings. Officially they were all greek, specifically Kione greek.

The espitile of the Barnabas, as I posted earlier in this thread is the 1st century authentic copy. This gospel been dated to around 1600AD. It also contains a very very critical error. chapter 82 states the year of the jubilee is every 100 years. when it is ever 50 years. There was a time a pope made the mistake and pronounced it wrong giving confusion in around 1300AD. The next pope made the correction re-pronouncing it as every 50 years again.

This would date the Italian version as being written ca. 1300. However, according to the Daily News article in OP link, the copy found by the Turks is written in Syriac, a dialect of Aramaic, and dates from the fifth century. That it's written in Syriac might well indicate it predates the Qur'an. However, later redactions could have been made to bring it into line with orthodox Islamic views of Jesus.

Of course, all this is a bit academic, since Mohammad's assertion in the Qur'an that Jesus wasn't actually crucified is clearly based on second century Gnostic texts. Mohammad used sixth century Christian legends, such as that of the seven sleepers of Ephesus and treated it as being as canonical as the gospels. He also treated midrashes as being as canonical as the Jewish scriptures.

[Minoosh]

Something I've never understood about the "not son of God" position - Islam thinks Jesus was born of a virgin, so who was his father?

If it was a miracle does it really matter if God contributed DNA? I mean, does God have DNA? Presumably miracles happen because God wants them to - so, miraculous God-sponsored birth, son of God, what's the difference?

If I had to choose one religion or the other it would be Islam. It just makes more sense to me intellectually. I don't understand the concept of the trinity, or why God would need a son to save people.

I went to a cathedral in Iran and our assistant bus driver Amir bought a crucifix, and wore it, and didn't seem to be hiding it. But a lot of things weren't like I expected. This was in 2003, a relatively open time.

[AvalonXQ]

Something I've never understood about the "not son of God" position - Islam thinks Jesus was born of a virgin, so who was his father?

If it was a miracle does it really matter if God contributed DNA? I mean, does God have DNA? Presumably miracles happen because God wants them to - so, miraculous God-sponsored birth, son of God, what's the difference?

The unity of God -- His uniqueness, and the fact that no other being shares His divinity -- is a central teaching of Islam.

The idea of God having a son, of any other being having any portion of godhood (including Muhammed himself), is contrary to their core teachings about the oneness and supremacy of God.

So, it matters a great deal to them that God used a word of creation to speak Isa into existence, but Isa is no more God's son than any other man and is no more than a Prophet and the Messiah.

[dafydd]

The unity of God -- His uniqueness, and the fact that no other being shares His divinity -- is a central teaching of Islam.

The idea of God having a son, of any other being having any portion of godhood (including Muhammed himself), is contrary to their core teachings about the oneness and supremacy of God.

So, it matters a great deal to them that God used a word of creation to speak Isa into existence, but Isa is no more God's son than any other man and is no more than a Prophet and the Messiah.

Which religion is the true one? I'm wavering between Christianity and Islam, I want to make the right choice, I don't want to go to hell.

[Marduk]

Which religion is the true one? I'm wavering between Christianity and Islam, I want to make the right choice, I don't want to go to hell.

pantheism covers all the bases
:D

[blobru]

:eusa_pray: And can also get you burned at the stake (Giordano Bruno). :flamed:

[Marduk]

:eusa_pray: And can also get you burned at the stake (Giordano Bruno). :flamed:

anything but being a catholic would do that
:D

[blobru]

Funny how the word "catholic" means literally "all"-inclusive (of course for the Church, this meant all should think like they do, not that anyone should worship all, which confusion may have led to poor Bruno's fatal mistake).

==============worship all, will you? not on my watch you don't, mister...
:wackynotworthy:====:xmas0643

[Craig B]

:eusa_pray: And can also get you burned at the stake (Giordano Bruno). :flamed: I had a look at that statue on Sunday. The Campo dei Fiori is one of my favourite places. Great street market there, as well as the famous statue. I read a book recently, which refers to it: The War Upon Religion, Francis Cunningham, Boston, 1911.In 1889, the votaries of every manner of disorder, intellectual, religious, and social, celebrated the reign of anarchy by the unveiling, in the Campo dei Fiori, of a statue of Giordano Bruno, an apostate monk, who has thus become the patron of anti-Christianism in Rome. Every year thenceforth the anniversary of the taking of Rome has been made the occasion of insult and defamation against the Holy See and the Catholic religion. Last year, Nathan, the Jewish Mayor of Rome, carried effrontery to its extreme. In a speech delivered on the occasion of the 20th September he hurled abuse, calumny and insult upon the Holy See in a manner to call for protests from even the anti-clerical forces of the City. The Holy Father himself uttered a vigorous protest, which met with responsive sympathy from every part of the Catholic world.

[Theofrak]

The Bible is full of pseudepigraphical writing, e.g., 2nd Timothy wasn't written by Paul. It shouldn't be surprising that there are other pseudepigraphical works that didn't make it into the Bible.

[Craig B]

The Bible is full of pseudepigraphical writing, e.g., 2nd Timothy wasn't written by Paul. It shouldn't be surprising that there are other pseudepigraphical works that didn't make it into the Bible. More than just that one. From wikiPaul: Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, and Philemon. Six additional letters bearing Paul's name lack academic consensus: Ephesians, Colossians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Timothy, and Titus. Hebrews is not now attributed to Paul either. And a couple of epistles in the name of Paul - 3 Corinthians and Laodiceans - failed to make it into the New Testament.

[Theofrak]

More than just that one. From wiki Hebrews is not now attributed to Paul either. And a couple of epistles in the name of Paul - 3 Corinthians and Laodiceans - failed to make it into the New Testament.

Agreed. I didn't mean it to be an exclusive list. I was a member of a religion for 30 years that was completely based on pseudopigrapha -- Mormonism.

[Craig B]

Agreed. I didn't mean it to be an exclusive list. I was a member of a religion for 30 years that was completely based on pseudopigrapha -- Mormonism. Dear God! And how!! Poor old Joe Smith and his Book of Abraham phoney translation of an Egyptian scroll. Alas, news of the recent decipherment of hieroglyphs hadn't reached the remoter reaches of the USA when he pulled that scam.

Not that it did him any harm. His religion is still going strong.

[blobru]

I had a look at that statue on Sunday. The Campo dei Fiori is one of my favourite places. Great street market there, as well as the famous statue. I read a book recently, which refers to it: The War Upon Religion, Francis Cunningham, Boston, 1911.


Pics next time? :j2:

[Craig B]

Pics next time? :j2: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Brunostatue.jpg Pic of Apostate Monk. It's amazing that the Rev Francis Cunningham doesn't even mention that he was burned to death in that place, let alone explain why. He's right about one thing though: the statue is a venue for atheist gatherings.

[blobru]

Here's the wiki on Ernesto Nathan, the Jewish mayor of Rome in 1910 who had the Rev. Cunningham so revved up with his calumny hurling and whatnot.

hey, watch it with that calumny you be hurlin', you pope-hatin' jew you!
:duck:

[Evolved Wookie]

...wasn't Barnabas the talking dog? I don't know the Bible well, but there's a talking dog, right? There's got to be! And the bit where they pull off old JHWH's mask and it turns out it's the guy who runs the haunted amusement park...

[Halfcentaur]

I love the mythology around angels and demons and how certain characters have changed over time, like Samael. It reminds me of watching the Prophecy as a teen around 16 and wishing that I still believed in classic Christianity, angels and all. Wars in heaven seemed awesome in a fantasy geek sort of context.

[AvalonXQ]

I love the mythology around angels and demons and how certain characters have changed over time, like Samael. It reminds me of watching the Prophecy as a teen around 16 and wishing that I still believed in classic Christianity, angels and all. Wars in heaven seemed awesome in a fantasy geek sort of context.

I watched The Prophecy for the first time only recently. I greatly enjoy angel / demon mythology as well.

[Evolved Wookie]

Then I highly recommend Mike Carey's Lucifer comics. Top stuff.

[Mudcat]

And Frodo got his class via Bilbo's wealth.


What wealth? According to Bilbo, he gave it all away.

[Mudcat]

...wasn't Barnabas the talking dog? I don't know the Bible well, but there's a talking dog, right? There's got to be! And the bit where they pull off old JHWH's mask and it turns out it's the guy who runs the haunted amusement park...

You're thinking of Barbas (http://elderscrolls.wikia.com/wiki/Barbas) I believe.

[One Skunk Todd]

If it really had the potential to have the kind of impact that Iran is claiming, why did they sit on it for 12 years?

They were hoping to upstage the release of Diablo III. They needn't have bothered.

[KevinCanada]

This would date the Italian version as being written ca. 1300. However, according to the Daily News article in OP link, the copy found by the Turks is written in Syriac, a dialect of Aramaic, and dates from the fifth century. That it's written in Syriac might well indicate it predates the Qur'an. However, later redactions could have been made to bring it into line with orthodox Islamic views of Jesus.

Of course, all this is a bit academic, since Mohammad's assertion in the Qur'an that Jesus wasn't actually crucified is clearly based on second century Gnostic texts. Mohammad used sixth century Christian legends, such as that of the seven sleepers of Ephesus and treated it as being as canonical as the gospels. He also treated midrashes as being as canonical as the Jewish scriptures.

It just means it was likely written after 1300, not at 1300. There is a lot of information that goes into dating these books when found. Languages, writting styles, location, context of what is written and so forth. Out of hundreds of books found, never once ever was there a mention of a another prophet.

If it was written in syriac, then It is a truely unique find, but even then it does not mean it to is not also a fake, I be inclined to think it is fake for three reasons.

1) it is written in the wrong language
2) The Iranians claim it mentions Mohammed (this has never existed before)
3) they will not allow outside review of the text....

they are holding onto that like Mohammed did with the Qur'an, no outside review but still claiming it is truth... it's laughable.

The Vatican has requested to review the document but was denied. Conspiracies and pedophilia aside, the Vatican does have a impeccable track record on handing ancient documents. Plus the Vatican does allow outside researchers with a pass and proven credentials of course to view documents in their underground vault.

No I am not catholic, I disagree with catholic teachings, So I play no favoritism when advocating the vatican would treat the document properly.

Until that happens I am calling Iran's bluff.