Religion

Response to edhopper (Reply #83)

Post removed

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

126 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Is ‘The Lost Gospel’ Book a Fraud? [View all] cbayer Nov 2014 OP

No, it is an actual ancient document. Now, does it actually reveal an historica fact? Agnosticsherbet Nov 2014 #1

wrong. Leontius Nov 2014 #18

Nice word, but zero to back it up? Agnosticsherbet Nov 2014 #19

History of Bible Canon backs it up. Leontius Nov 2014 #21

I have studied some of the history. Agnosticsherbet Nov 2014 #24

Nicaea had nothing to with Bible canon. Constantine had nothing to do with Bible canon. Leontius Nov 2014 #41

Among its accomplisments, The Council of Nicea formed the beginning of Canon Law. Agnosticsherbet Nov 2014 #48

Canon law and the Canon of the Bible are to entirely different subjects. Leontius Nov 2014 #54

You're right in spirit, biblical canon was something that was selected by the victors. enki23 Mar 2015 #124

What is wrong, we know there were multiple before the Romans Gospels Exultant Democracy Nov 2014 #28

This message was self-deleted by its author Act_of_Reparation Mar 2015 #119

So fan fiction dates back nearly 2000 years? Goblinmonger Nov 2014 #2

Would it change your thoughts... gcomeau Mar 2015 #117

I don't know if it is z fraud or not but I don't believe it. hrmjustin Nov 2014 #3

Neither know nor care much TexasProgresive Nov 2014 #4

That's really interesting. cbayer Nov 2014 #8

I think the first time I ran across it was "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" TexasProgresive Nov 2014 #9

I'm not at all knowledgable about this story, though I have heard it murmured. cbayer Nov 2014 #10

No more, or less than the rest of the gospels. notrightatall Nov 2014 #5

The entire Bible is a fraud. Nothing new here. Move along. stopbush Nov 2014 #6

Well, stop bush, I did not know that you were a scholar cbayer Nov 2014 #7

Not at all extreme. stopbush Nov 2014 #15

You can discount all the supernatural bullshit as being pure fantasy? cbayer Nov 2014 #16

Do you honestly think it takes the same amount of faith to NOT believe in leprechauns... trotsky Nov 2014 #17

And, of course, you have to trot out your meme about there being no difference Fortinbras Armstrong Nov 2014 #22

I'll admit you're right when you say something that is. trotsky Nov 2014 #23

What is the difference between believing in god and believing leprechauns? Exultant Democracy Nov 2014 #30

What the flying fuck? Warren Stupidity Nov 2014 #25

One of your sillier tirades. okasha Nov 2014 #32

Of course I can discount it because I don't have the mind of a child. stopbush Nov 2014 #51

You know, I'm sure that you are actually a nice person cbayer Nov 2014 #53

Here's how a typical cbayer post reads to me: stopbush Nov 2014 #58

Well, I guess that is because you can't distinguish between cbayer Nov 2014 #59

Why should there be a distinction between gods that people believed in in the past stopbush Nov 2014 #60

Because they are different. cbayer Nov 2014 #77

Quite a lame answer, even from you. stopbush Nov 2014 #78

Lame answer, even from me? Third grade? cbayer Nov 2014 #79

I think this is the second or third time you've been "done with me." You'll be back. stopbush Nov 2014 #80

Conceit? Obsession? Not cogent? Deserve to be insulted? Lame Tactics? cbayer Nov 2014 #81

Declaring victory and heading home, are we? stopbush Nov 2014 #98

You made it personal Lordquinton Nov 2014 #100

I have thoroughly enjoyed this thread. n/t trotsky Nov 2014 #108

Sorry about your alert not working out. cbayer Nov 2014 #110

FYI Douglas Carpenter Nov 2014 #105

Thanks for the info and thanks for the thoughtful responses from jury members. cbayer Nov 2014 #111

Just to get this straight, the plausibility Warren Stupidity Nov 2014 #68

In case anyone was wondering what an ad hominem looked like Lordquinton Nov 2014 #99

You are correct. Post #80 is a very long ad hominem - zero substance just a litany of personal cbayer Nov 2014 #109

LOL trotsky Nov 2014 #112

Is incuriosity coupled with derisive dismissal LTX Nov 2014 #67

Yes, at about the same time tha santa Warren Stupidity Nov 2014 #69

So you have solved the puzzle of effective immaterialities? LTX Nov 2014 #70

There is no such thing. Please proceed. Warren Stupidity Nov 2014 #71

There is no such thing as an effective immateriality? LTX Nov 2014 #72

I was clear. Please proceed. Warren Stupidity Nov 2014 #73

Well, actually, you weren't clear. LTX Nov 2014 #74

You can't seem to proceed. Perhaps some immateriality is effectively blocking you? Warren Stupidity Nov 2014 #75

Ok, so assuming you are, in fact, contending that there is no such thing LTX Nov 2014 #76

Are you equating mathematics edhopper Nov 2014 #83

Apparently. Warren Stupidity Nov 2014 #84

Post removed Post removed Nov 2014 #86

You seem to have a simplistic notion of materialists edhopper Nov 2014 #91

And conversely, you seem to view "concepts and human experience" LTX Nov 2014 #93

No one said they edhopper Nov 2014 #96

You claim that they have "Simplistic explaination" Lordquinton Nov 2014 #101

Absent squishy wet gray matter where are Warren Stupidity Nov 2014 #85

Reject it all you want. In the meantime, please point me to the mathematics particle. LTX Nov 2014 #87

"the mathematics particle" - ideas about mathematics exist in our heads. Warren Stupidity Nov 2014 #97

Mathamatecs particle, real specific demand Lordquinton Nov 2014 #102

It seems we won't get that demand due to a ridiculous jury decision. Warren Stupidity Nov 2014 #107

There seems to be a strong genetic predisposition to religion edhopper Nov 2014 #82

Indeed there are. But there is also a correlation between "religious" LTX Nov 2014 #88

Yes edhopper Nov 2014 #89

But we cannot assume that we have answers to those things that people most LTX Nov 2014 #90

Maybe we don't edhopper Nov 2014 #92

The veracity of its claims are judged by those who take solace LTX Nov 2014 #94

Nah edhopper Nov 2014 #95

Its because those whose brains make assumptions and attribute agency to random events are more... Humanist_Activist Mar 2015 #116

Umm... gcomeau Mar 2015 #118

Yeah, they are all stories yet have historical and personal elements in context of the time written pinto Nov 2014 #20

So much ignorance in so few words. Bravo! okasha Nov 2014 #33

The james ossuary is bullshit outside of biblical studies nutjobs, the list of kings included david Warren Stupidity Nov 2014 #36

Still whirling, I see. okasha Nov 2014 #37

I'll go with the Israeli Antiquities Authority: a fake. nt. Warren Stupidity Nov 2014 #43

James ossuary? Goblinmonger Nov 2014 #45

You call my post ignorant, then cite the James ossuary as a counter? stopbush Nov 2014 #50

You see, it's like the Emperor's New Clothes. trotsky Nov 2014 #52

"It’s not Lost, it’s not a Gospel, it’s a very naughty marketing campaign" muriel_volestrangler Nov 2014 #11

Lol, that's what I thought as well. cbayer Nov 2014 #13

It's fascinating to me that books (gospels) were written about Jesus, et al for hundreds of years. pinto Nov 2014 #12

Agree, I would be most interested in a course. cbayer Nov 2014 #14

Um they are still being written. Warren Stupidity Nov 2014 #26

Yeah, they are in some way shape or form. I get that. My point was the genesis of the originals, pinto Nov 2014 #31

"why these books" was settled by decree and the power of the Roman State. Warren Stupidity Nov 2014 #35

The canon of the gospels was established okasha Nov 2014 #39

I guess Dan is editing wikipedia too. Warren Stupidity Nov 2014 #42

Previous. okasha Nov 2014 #44

Here is what you said: Warren Stupidity Nov 2014 #46

Well, she hasn't provided "nothing." trotsky Nov 2014 #47

Post removed Post removed Mar 2015 #113

there used to be lots of "gospels" floating around flyingfysh Nov 2014 #27

It proves a lot about the contruction of the christian mythos. Exultant Democracy Nov 2014 #29

Am I the only person here okasha Nov 2014 #34

The two people involved are serial hoaxers unrepentant progress Nov 2014 #38

I'm not familir with Wilson okasha Nov 2014 #40

In this case, I think I'm going to skip the read and go with the legitimate reviews. cbayer Nov 2014 #49

These authors have located an old Syriac translation of a popular much older Jewish short story struggle4progress Nov 2014 #66

Hey... 2naSalit Nov 2014 #55

No more a fraud than the famous four. n/t Gore1FL Nov 2014 #56

If it's a fraud, staple it to the bible. It'll be in good company. AtheistCrusader Nov 2014 #57

"... The text has been previously been seen as a Jewish exploration of the Biblical story of Joseph struggle4progress Nov 2014 #61

"... Purporting to describe the marriage of Joseph – the Old Testament Joseph, struggle4progress Nov 2014 #62

"... We're basically looking at a sensationalist money-making scheme here, and there's nothing else struggle4progress Nov 2014 #63

... Oxford University professor Diarmaid MacCulloch told Britain's Sunday Times that the book struggle4progress Nov 2014 #64

"... Mr. Jacobovici’s new book essentially claims that the 6th century CE Syriac language version struggle4progress Nov 2014 #65

Bunk MFM008 Nov 2014 #103

You are a member of an early tribe just getting by. Notafraidtoo Nov 2014 #104

Trouble is, you know this and we know this, but - mr blur Nov 2014 #106

This message was self-deleted by its author goldent Mar 2015 #114

Uhm, is anyone not going to mention the fact that this is a 6th century document? Humanist_Activist Mar 2015 #115

I just want to know who resurrected this zombie op and why. nt. Warren Stupidity Mar 2015 #120

Post #113 muriel_volestrangler Mar 2015 #121

Aparantly Skepticscott felt the need to insult okasha. hrmjustin Mar 2015 #122

This message was self-deleted by its author greendog Mar 2015 #123

It's an interesting story, I guess. enki23 Mar 2015 #125

I will wade into this morass to my probable regret. Half-Century Man Mar 2015 #126