History for Atheists

GoT - Lambdin Translation...

(15) Jesus said, "When you see one who was not born of woman, prostrate yourselves on your faces and worship him. That one is your father."

(105) Jesus said, "He who knows the father and the mother will be called the son of a harlot."

(79) A woman from the crowd said to him, "Blessed are the womb which bore you and the breasts which nourished you."
He said to her, "Blessed are those who have heard the word of the father and have truly kept it. For there will be days when you will say, 'Blessed are the womb which has not conceived and the breasts which have not given milk.'"

Third quote is entirely out of context.  I would love to see what historians and linguists make of the other unscriptural BS.  Where are your references?

Ha, Max. When I read GoT I immediately thought Game of Thrones which threw me off a little 

Gospel of Thomas, I should have known from the context. 

I’m curious about the post on Nazareth because I have also read that there was no such place in those days and that the confusion comes from a sect called the Nazarenes of which Jesus was said to be a member. Is there any definitive source on this point?

History for Atheists on Answers in Reason

It is always nice to be invited to speak to other atheists and to highlight the work I do here on History for Atheists. This week I had the pleasure of talking to Davidian from Answers in Reason in a live discussion which was mainly about the historical Jesus but also on how history is analysed, the nature of ancient source material and the problem of atheist bad history and anti-theist tribalism.

We did not get to cover many other topics, so we are planning for a second show where I will try to cover the myths around Christians causing the “Dark Ages”, destroying ancient learning and suppressing science etc.

https://youtu.be/3EqnYvVTpU8

Ha, Max. When I read GoT I immediately thought Game of Thrones which threw me off a little 

Gospel of Thomas, I should have known from the context.

I would have given it more credence if it had been Game Of Thrones.

I would have given it more credence if it had been Game Of Thrones.

Is there less reason to doubt the veracity of the Gospel of Thomas, compared to what books were selected to make up the Bible?

Is there less reason to doubt the veracity of the Gospel of Thomas, compared to what books were selected to make up the Bible?

Most bible scholars seem to think so and certainly, if the canonical gospels are right then the gospel of Thomas is definitely wrong.  I remember reading a portion of it once and the whole grammar was weird.  Maybe it was a translation thing?  I dunno but that and the strange incoherent ideas in it were more like New Age teachings than Biblical Christianity.  I wouldn't trust it myself.

Most bible scholars seem to think so and certainly, if the canonical gospels are right then the gospel of Thomas is definitely wrong.  I remember reading a portion of it once and the whole grammar was weird.  Maybe it was a translation thing?  I dunno but that and the strange incoherent ideas in it were more like New Age teachings than Biblical Christianity.  I wouldn't trust it myself.

Interesting, I would say all scriptural religions have a higher probability of being wrong than right when it comes to particulars. When it comes to certain overarching themes there might be something there though.

Similarly Gnosticism I think is wrong in particulars but seems the overarching idea might have some merit. The whole world as prison does feel to be somewhat melodramatic though and we don't have many cases in Survival literature suggesting it's true. OTOH certain material within Ufology does suggest there might be something to the idea that we are under the influence of powerful intelligences that wish to restrict us.

When you say "most Bible scholars" do you mean they don't think Jesus said those words, whereas they think it's credible to say Jesus said the words in the Gospels that make it into the Bible?

Interesting, I would say all scriptural religions have a higher probability of being wrong than right when it comes to particulars. When it comes to certain overarching themes there might be something there though.

Similarly Gnosticism I think is wrong in particulars but seems the overarching idea might have some merit. The whole world as prison does feel to be somewhat melodramatic though and we don't have many cases in Survival literature suggesting it's true. OTOH certain material within Ufology does suggest there might be something to the idea that we are under the influence of powerful intelligences that wish to restrict us.

When you say "most Bible scholars" do you mean they don't think Jesus said those words, whereas they think it's credible to say Jesus said the words in the Gospels that make it into the Bible?

I think there are good and bad ideas in so many philosophies and I often find myself questioning even the early disciples beliefs.  I've been looking around for something authoritative but the net is full of opinions masquerading as facts so it's hard to do.  This seems to me to give a balanced view of the gospel in question.  There is a saying from the gospel quoted here and it's a good example of what made me cringe when I read it.

http://www.enterthebible.org/blog.aspx?m=3783&post=779

" On the other hand, many quotations in Thomas are quite strange. Consider the 22nd saying, which reads: “When you make the two into one, and when you make the inside like the outside and the outside like the inside, and what is above like what is below, and when you make male and female into a single one, so that the male will not be male nor the female be female, when you make a pair of eyes in place of one eye, a hand in place of a hand, a foot in place of a foot, an image in place of an image, then you will enter [the Kingdom].”"

I just can't imagine Jesus saying such stuff.  David Icke maybe but not Jesus.