Mikeuk

Very good point WK.

A sceptic may doubt everything until he has the proof before him, but only fools and knaves attempt to construct 'alternative reality' in the manner you suggest.

The big zero of 'Conspiracy Theory' links the Da Vinci Code with Holocaust Revisionism and a multitude of other cranky notions.

As an aside, it's interesting to note how a fantasy-based approach which was once the preserve of Neo-Nazis and the like has now spread to the left. Checkout any number of websites about lizards in the Royal Family, Bilderbergers etc if you doubt this.

But possibly the 'feminist' message of the Da Vinci Code makes it the world's first truly PC conspiracy theory. :twisted:

Benjaminw1

But both can't be right...

Unfortunately for the touchy feely multi culti crowd, there is Truth and there is error..

Truth is True

QED

Benjaminw1

Cor!

Me too, with both books...

Spooky

Lawrie Boxall

Surely we can agree to differ on this.

Personally I think that Jesus Christ was just a man and the stories told about him are just that, stories. I was brought up as a Christian in the C of E and studied for and completed Confirmation (do they still call it that) but I just could not sustain belief in virgin birth and Jesus rising from the dead or the stories of the miracles. In fact I think their claim that Jesus was divine really lets Christianity down - a point correctly noted by the Islamists who looking to better the Jews quickly invented their own version.

I dislike anything pretentious and generally try to avoid it - one of the things I liked about UKIP was the general lack of pretention.

I think that his disciples probably made up these stories to draw attention to the greatness of their tribe - their teacher just had to be one better than anyone else. The same trend of home tribe agrandisement can be seen throughout the old testament. The Life of Brian satarised this extremely well I thought and there is no doubt in my mind the Pythons did it deliberately. Good on them I say.

But hey-ho - that's just my opinion - no-one harmed I hope by me expressing it. Fortunately we are politicians (well you are I am not) - and we can take a lesson from one of the wisest things Alistair Campbell ever said (probably the only wise thing he said) "we don't do God".

Rambling on - little gods and godesses were being discussed. I have read a bit of Virgil and Homer - don't want to read Nietzsche thanks Mike. My favourite godess, actually a fury, is Alecto, she of the "dread sisters station" - mainly because (in the translation I read) Virgil put those words into her mouth when she was in process of frightening Turnus rigid and provoking him to attack the Trojans.

Considering it was written what, I don't know, 2500 years ago and it could have been coined for the first time today it sounds so up to date, like the name of a new girl band.

That was what struck me about reading these books, particularly Homer's account of Odyssius's son Telemachus searching the mainland for news of his father, i.e. the similarities of the ancient society with our own today. Heirarchical, class ridden, deferential, their royalty is directly comparable to our own as is the formality of their etiquette, their love of hospitality, family life, sport, music, story telling, etc, if the backdrop Homer gives his story tells us anything. They too were extremely superstitious people and they believed in the after-life albeit a rather long and dull one for most people.

I am not saying any of this is wrong far from it, only that no-one should fool themselves for a moment that our Christian society is very different from their ancient one with their "primative" collections of small gods. In fact reading this stuff I felt I understood far better where our own civilisation had its deepest roots, in the ancient Greek/Trojan ones of 3000 years earlier.

Lawrie Boxall

Sorry - Virgil's account of Telemachus etc not Homer's

Lawrie Boxall

oh dear - right the first time - I think this is called losing the plot

Mikeuk

Lawrie, whether you believe in God or not is down to faith. His existence can't be proved or disproved.

What I (and others) object to is the deliberate misrepresentation of what are generally believed to be historical facts, which in our recent discussion concerned the Council of Nicaea, the reasons for its convention, and the results of its deliberations.

It's a very, very long time ago, but nowhere near as long ago as the Trojan Wars, so there's much less room for speculation and myth.

Of course extreme relativists can argue that nobody really knows what is true and what is false, so Dan Brown’s concept of truth is as valid as anybody else’s.

Really, though, that’s not a very practical position to take, especially for political activists who claim to occupy a position which is more authentic, truthful, virtuous, ‘useful’ or whatever than that of the opposition.

Sorry, I don’t rate ‘The Life of Brian’. I never could get into the Python thing even when, years later, I tried to force myself to like it. Renan’s Life of Jesus wins hands down.

White knight

[quote]The Christian claim that Jesus is God is where the big difference comes in understanding Jesus. Historians and people of other faiths are fine until we reach the point of calling Jesus God. So why do Christians say that he is?
The claim that Jesus is God can be traced to the very heart of the gospel. Although Jesus did not exactly use the words "I am God" he said many other things that mean the same. "I and the Father are one" and "before Abraham was, I am" (I am is one of the names of God found in the old testament). Jesus demonstrated that he held the same authority as God. Jesus forgave sin and cast out demon powers, things that really only God can do. Even his disciples wondered at his authority, "even the wind and the waves obey him". Now it is hard to dispel the impact of the fact that his friends and family became the very ones declaring him to be God. The people who knew this man best, the ones who had walked with him and eaten with him are the very ones who first say Jesus is God.
Jesus time and again demonstrated how he fulfilled the predictions made about the Messiah in the old testament. The miracles that he performed demonstrated his unique ability to do things that no one else can.
If Jesus is nothing more that a man then he was certainly a great one and worthy to be admired. His teaching and the way he lived his life are great examples to us all, yet we must go further. Jesus claimed that he was God now if he made this claim and it was false he must be written off as a mad or evil man yet if he is not mad or evil (psychiatrists have examined the evidence and confirmed his sanity and if he was evil why doesn't he help so many and claim no earthly power for himself, something evil people always seem to do) the only alternative was that his claim is true.


With Christianity it is based on faith and belief that Jesus died on the Cross for the sins of the world. Christianity addresses forgiveness of sin.

With other religions it seems that you have to earn your way to heaven such as doing good deeds. But the question with earning your way into heaven is how do you know if you have done enough good deeds? Are all good deeds weighted equally?

Lawrie Boxall

You are citing human evidence to justify your beliefs and we know humans are fallible beings.

But justification is unecessary because the whole point of having a faith is that it cannot be proven - if it could be proven no faith would be needed. It's enough that you believe.

C_steam

Do the words 'off topic' mean anything round here?



hey - just go with it. It's better than the C*** previously on this thread.