Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Hardcopies ready! Thankyou to all who helped.
Paul, AGR, Ewan, Valentin, Stephen, etc (all are in the acknowledgements part of the book) you know who you are, you have all helped and for that I am eternally grateful.

Hi Everyone,

Link: <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""> ... stance.htm</a><!-- m -->

As many of you know, I have been working on a book called Was the New Testament Really Written in Greek? It is finally available in hardcopy today, available print-on-demand from Lulu, the world's largest self-publisher. The book has been edited and converted to a standard book format by Ewan MacLeod and a proper cover has been designed by my graphic designer nephew, Stephen Meza.

Buy soft and hardcover copies at <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->

This is not a for-profit venture. The book is intended to be a gift to any interested (online pdf version always will be FREE). Where does the money go? Any royalties received from the book and the website go towards running costs for the website and continual promotion of the Aramaic Peshitta.

Download the updated PDF version (free) here: <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->

There is now another cause:

Now we plan to publish for the mainstream, please assist us in achieving this. Funds required for this will approximate to $750. This will allow us to purchase a publishing package including marketing and promotion, professional editing/design, major listings, access to the Amazon and Borders markets, and more. I have put my money where my mouth is by chipping in the first $50. A friend of mine has chipped in another $50.

Surplus monies: In the event that donations exceed the needs of this book and website (<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->), the excess will go towards a charitable organisation currently being setup by myself and some colleagues. Using our knowledge of finance, our unlimited belief and never-say-die attitude, we are creating a non-profit organisation, the likes of which the world has never seen before. Both these projects are dear to my heart and the success and exposure of each will contribute to the success and exposure of the other.

If you are interested, please make a donation.

And as my birthday is coming up (next Friday)... This would probably be the best present anyone could give me right now.

Here is the link to donate: <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""> ... stance.htm</a><!-- m -->

Best Regards,

Raphael Lataster
As I'm interested to learn as much as I can about Aramaic primacy, I was trying to download the free version of the book "Was the New Testament Really Written in Greek?" from the provided link (<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->), but apparently the links have changed.

Searching for the title I found various other download locations here ({edit:} the latest available version seems to be the one from May 2008. Apparently Raphael changed the numbering scheme of his editions as 'Edition 1e' is from March 2008 whereas 'Edition 1a' - from - is dated May 2008 and has more pages and a colored cover.)

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""> ... reek1e.pdf</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""> ... nGreek.pdf</a><!-- m -->

But after looking at Raphael Lataster's sites, I begin to wonder, if any of his writings can be relied on: He promotes Pantheism and Atheism (quote: 'There just isn't any good evidence for any god, let alone Yahweh.') Additionally he makes gross and libelous statements about Yahweh our heavenly Father, which are too vile to mention here. Regarding Yeshua and the Scriptures he states: "There is no evidence whatsoever that Jesus even existed, let alone whether all the Bible's claims about him are true.", "The Bible contradicts itself, history, archeology, science, and just about everything else it can contradict. For a book that tells us how to live our lives, that asks us to kill and die in god's name, this simply isn't good enough."

He makes these statements after studying and promoting Aramaic primacy for a number of years. This is an astonishing about-face. The character of the author will somehow be reflected in his work. Do his newly published anti-biblical beliefs put into question the research he has done while he was apparently a believer in the Word of God?

In the light of his recent statements and publications, does or Andrew Gabriel Roth still recommend his book and current website?

Please don't become discouraged with his compilation of evidences just because some of his beliefs are offending you. His work on the Aramaic Text is concerned with the superiority of it over the Greek and the examples are from so many perspectives that it's an excellent read. The Hebrew Old Testament and 22-book canon of the Peshitta with the later texts of the Western 5 (2nd Peter, 2nd & 3rd John, Jude, and Revelation) give us a fully Semitic Bible. Even though the extra-Peshitta (Western 5) books have a few curious readings, the grammar is far more intact (99.9% flawless most likely) and there are words with multiple meanings which clear up some foggy areas on troubling passages such as the word for "bed" can also mean "coffin" in the passage where Yeshua states that He will throw Jezebel into a bed. The next verse says that He will slay her children with death so the "coffin" reading seems superior. Just keep in mind that this is a compilation of proof-texts from several contributors and not a theologically biased work.

Shlama w'Burkate, Bro. Larry
I do agree that his statements were misleading. I contributed quite an amount and found out that he founded his church with the donations. If he had said that in advance, I would not have donated.

The LULU publication, does not require an initial investement.
Shlama and Happy New Year!

Long time no see! Thought I'd drop by and say hello as a recent client of mine turned out to be Assyrian (his name tipped me off, as well as his Assyrian-looking keychain), and we had a great discussion on the value of the Peshitta and of the CoE which is apparently in my neck of the woods. He also gave me a copy of the Peshitta which was awesome.

Thankyou Larry for your comments. Indeed, I am currently editing the book to remove theology and leave the textual comparisons, now that I have just about finished iGod.

Yes it is true; I am a pantheist/atheist and no longer believe in fundamentalist Christianity. I wrestled with the idea of keeping my Aramaic site alive and decided to, as there is indeed much use to it for believers and non-believers alike. Perhaps it is even vital in showing evangelicals that Jews and Arameans weren?t always so literal? Though I am an atheist, I am still happy to be called a Christian (a Christian atheist like Robert Price for example), and arguably am a Christian in one of the most ancient modes (the Gnostics, or non-literalists). And I do still find value in the Peshitta. In fact, I am currently working on another book which shows some of the awesome Christ-teachings, and their equivalent teachings in the older Eastern traditions of Taoism, Buddhism and Hinduism.

As an aside, I think I am a much better person and Christian now since leaving fundamentalism. I look back with embarrassment at my behaviour (including on this very forum), such as spreading racist and homophobic hatred, and being argumentative on issues such as doctrine. I even dragged Paul Younan into a debate with Mr. Conder which was surely one of my low points ? I have since apologised many times to Paul and Mr. Conder.

Mr. Roth is indeed disappointed with my "conversion" but I do have much love for him. I will never forget for example that it is he who gave me my name. Larry is also correct in saying that the book is a compilation of arguments from various Peshitta-promoters (such as Paul, Andrew and Larry), not just myself. In an act of humility I could only say "compiled by Raphael Lataster" on the cover.

As for claims of my church, this is actually incorrect. I do not belong to any church, distazo is referring to my charity (now renamed the All One Charity - actually a foundation) which is and always has been totally secular. I most certainly have not done any of these ventures to make a quick buck. I have dedicated my life to learning, teaching, charity, equality and social justice, which seems more in line with a Christ-like life than the posterity-evangelicals... I may be in a position to 'retire' in a few years, so I will do my PhD and try to become a lecturer either in philosophy or religious studies.

I no longer study the Peshitta, having already studied much in that field, and having much more to study now that I am more liberal (philosophy, comparative religion, Eastern spiritualties, psychology, etc), but think of you with fondness.

Keep studying, and keep discussing. May we all have an excellent new year!

Best Regards,

Raphael Lataster
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->
HI Raphael,

Thanks for clearning this up. HOwever, I was referring to the 'was the bible really written in Greek' book, which was lacking funds for publishing according to your download web page.

I clearly understood that this donation was for that book. After the 1000$ was complete, suddenly your own 'church of pantheism' was founded.
If I'm wrong on that, sorry for the misunderstanding, but I hope I did not donate for something else than the publication of your book.

No hard feelings further. We all have our spiritual path.
(b.t.w. I am a christian too, non-member of any church, and I was fundamentalistic religious in the past, too)

Thankyou distazo, I can only commend you for choosing a non-denominational path. To me it is a sign of great honesty and sincerity (which sect is the true one - it's one or none). And it allows you to study the Word and other sources with far less mental barriers. It also shows a commendable level of self-sacrifice on your part as you forego some of the ?happier? aspects of church life when you choose that road less travelled.

I would later take the "one or none" concept to a higher level, applying it to all belief systems and religions, not just to Christianity - hence my position today. I see it as intellectual honesty. If I see evidence for any particular church or sect, I would be happy to join. Still very happy to spread the Christ-messages of unity and peace, which truly are not limited to any one sect.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->
To Raphael, what changed your mind that you no longer believe in God?
Hi Sean,

Well, there are a number of reasons, which are outlined in my new book iGod ( ). They include the lack of evidence for Yahweh and Jesus and the mounds of evidence against their existence. Both the OT and NT have clear ties to older, pagan myths. I show how the hierarchy of gods in the Bible is virtually identical to the hierarchy in Greek mythology, for example (Yahweh isn?t the chief god according to Semitic mythology, Gnosticism, and even parts of the Bible itself ? he is an imperfect lower god).

As I said earlier, I took the "one or none" approach to a higher level and applied it to all religions, including my own. I had to honestly conclude that I had no grounds to believe/promote literalist Christianity over any other religion.

The fact that the Bible is full of contradictions (with itself, with history, with science etc.) didn't help either. The late dates of the Biblical books also make its use for historical truths appalling. And it's amazing how virtually the entire school of Jewish archaeology now agrees that the historical record goes totally against the Bible. There's no evidence of Moses, Abraham etc. In fact, they generally agree that the Israelites were Canaanites, and that the Exodus (itself totally unsupported by history) was a gross exaggeration of an event that occurred centuries earlier where Semites were DRIVEN OUT from Egypt (not enslaved).

Seeing so many of Jesus' life story details in other myths/religions and seeing his best messages echoed in Gnosticism, Buddhism and Taoism (all earlier religions) was a clear sign too. The Dao De Jing (Bible of Taoism) has more wisdom in its 20 pages than the entire Bible has in its 66 books - with none of the violent commands, racism, sexism, homophobia, etc.

It also didn?t help seeing the relative successes (if you consider equality, justice, liberty and peace successes that is) of more secular and atheistic countries like Australia and those comprising Scandinavia, as opposed to highly fundamentalist countries, like Iran, Israel, and certain Christian countries? When looking at happiness, crime levels, education etc. it simply isn?t true that atheism and secularism leads to darkness while religion leads to the light. Go to a country where they still chop people?s heads off regularly and you?ll see what I mean.

One of the biggest reasons why I turned from Christian fundamentalism was one of the biggest reasons why I got into the whole Aramaic primacy movement! The search for the early church. I finally found the early Christians and it destroyed my belief in literalist Christianity. I found that the earliest Christians didn't believe in a literal Jesus, that it was all based on myth and was later taken on board as historical fact (without any justification, but plenty of political motive ? a similar story occurred with the Old Testament). Hence my position now as a Christian atheist.

After my estrangement from my father, and especially after he passed away recently, I really considered how fundamentalist religion ruined his life and how it was ruining mine. I thus set out on a "spiritual journey" to find the truth and to find the meaning of life.

I started out in Theism of course (as a fundie) and was introduced to Deism. I fell in love with the idea of a creator-god who sort of loves us, but who really doesn?t expect anything of us. I then realised that this belief system combines the liberty of atheism, with the irrationality of believing in a god without any evidence. I thus followed full-blown Atheism. Note that atheism is not a position that there is no god, it is simply a lack of belief in any particular god ? a position fully grounded in honesty and reason.

I then stumbled onto the philosophy of Pantheism (naturalistic) which to me was essentially the same as atheism, but had a positive message of unity and peace (atheism itself is only the lack of belief in god ? it doesn?t tell you to be good or bad). Technically pantheism is the idea that all that is, is god, which pretty much rules out the idea of a personal god like Yahweh, but still leaves open all possibilities.

I also found it horrendous that people often setup a false dichotomy: there?s atheism, there?s Christianity and that?s it (often while throwing Pascal?s Wager at you). This is an arrogant approach that ignores the great diversities of belief systems, religions, and sub-religions. The only rational approach is to hold to the default (atheism and arguably naturalistic pantheism) and to hear out ALL the different religions, accepting one of them only when sufficient evidence has been presented. So far, none have provided sufficient evidence. See my website, for a quick look at the evidence that does exist.

I then started to study the Eastern religions and found that they generally were not religions at all ? not as we in the West tend to see religion, as fundamental truths. Polytheism plays a big part in Eastern Hinduism for example but is admittedly (by them!) based in myths, astrology, atheism, and pantheism ? much like the mysteries religions of Egypt, Greece and Rome. Buddhism is pretty much secular, and Taoism is so secular I wouldn?t call it a religion at all, more of a peaceful philosophy. Yet they all have wonderful pantheistic messages of peace and unity. I then saw how the ORIGINAL Christ was based on these Eastern philosophies, and so I am happy to call myself at once a Christian, a Gnostic, an atheist, an agnostic, a pantheist, a Taoist, etc. This journey also inspired the structure of my book. In fact, this little post is my book in a nutshell.

Finally. To be frank, when I was a fundie, I was a c*nt. Well, I was still a fairly good guy who believed in morals, hard work and charity; but I discriminated against gender, race, sexual orientation and religion. Now, as an atheist, I can honestly call myself a good person. I am a much better person, and ironically, a much better Christian.

Best Regards,

Raphael Lataster

p.s. I recently have been examining the arguments for God by William Lane Craig, one of the most famous Christian apologists out there and perhaps the religion?s ?best? debater. On my website, , I demolish his arguments. I expose the numerous logical fallacies he employs, and demonstrate how 4 of his ?5 points? are not specific to Christianity (you could make claims of creation, fine-tuning etc. for Zeus, Allah and other gods) and how the remaining point (Jesus? alleged resurrection) uses circular logic, and itself is full of assumptions and inaccuracies. This didn?t help my dwindling faith either: the painful performance of educated Christians in rational discussions. I had to face the truth. They look foolish because they can?t argue from evidence. They simply don?t have any.

p.p.s. From an emotional perspective, since shedding my fundie beliefs, I have never felt so free, and have never been happier. I have never had so much purpose and meaning in my life (I have dedicated my life to charity and to learning/teaching philosophy). I also am married to a wonderful woman (herself a generous and kind Christian, in the Salvation Army) who I would not have even considered dating had I stuck firmly to my once impregnable fundamentalist beliefs.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->

Jesus did exist but did not expose religious fundamentalism.

John 4 even shows that he predicted the end of holy-place centered religion but he predicted in-the-heart-faith.

Often people tend to walk extreme paths, your father fundamentalist, you extreme liberal.
The same applies to me. My father has ruined his life and his childrens, through American-style-religion from Brooklyn, I almost did and still struggle with the results of mind-control.

However, critisim on the existence of Jesus and gnosticism (this is what you relate to) is not new either. Taoism and wisdom does not solve the world issues either.
Hi distazo,

Quote:critisim on the existence of Jesus and gnosticism (this is what you relate to) is not new either

You are 100% correct my friend. In the historical record, there is nothing about Jesus for decades, and then when some people do start talking about Jesus, they are immediately pounced on by pagan critics - and even by fellow Christians like Gnostics. This criticism isn't new; it is as old as the religion itself, even older (as shown by the Dead Sea Scrolls). For more on this, I recommend you take a look at my book iGod. It's amazing how Christ's teachings even go back (with the Gnostics) to decades BEFORE Jesus was supposedly born. And how details of his life show up decades to centuries AFTER he supposedly died.

I'm also doing some incredible research now about the writings of the big-wigs of the early church, like Clement and Marcion. Eye-opening stuff. We'll need an iGod2 soon! <!-- s:biggrin: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/biggrin.gif" alt=":biggrin:" title="Big Grin" /><!-- s:biggrin: -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->
Dear Raphael,

You seem like an honest guy that would like to hold the truth regardless of the price. The problem i have with your writings is mostly that of definition. For example, you seem to say there is no God. Now, that all depends on definition. i for myself don't ask the question of God first, but the question of origin. Even if the big bang is just an endlessly repeating event, and there would be an infinite nuber of dimensions, this all still demands for an origin. Possibly trillions to the magnitute of trillions of years ago, but there was an origin. The fact that this origin produced physical laws, undeniable orders in the elements, and allowed for the development of complex organisms demands that i would call that origin superior to the result, as everything originated from it.
At the moment oforigin, one is moved to conclude, all things that exist were included in that origin. Just as time, space and matter only came into existence at the moment of the big bang. Just as these were undefinable until this moment, the origin of all things was even less definable (in fact not definable by any concept) at the first moment of its existence. Now, however that origin was like, that origin, to me, is God. The existence of all things is also proof of an origin (as well as an end). Naturally, this is expressed in the Bible. You may also realize i do not believe in the trinity.
So, if you ask a physician or a philosopher to define the origin of all things, that origin is what i refer to as "God". That there is intelligence and order in that origin is clearly expressed by the result of that origin.

Also, who is to say that we need clear, logically and eternally reproducible proof for God's existance? i have a load of prooffor his existence, but that proof is not transferrableto anyone else. This is the way God deals with people. He reveals himself to them that please him. He does thisnot only by emotions, but also by supernatural acts. But he does not wish to necessarily make this public allthe time. He controls the information about it.

Then you talk about religion. Religion is all about liturgy, and a set order of behaviour regardless of circumstances. Jesus preached the exact opposite. He wanted our morals to be adjusted to the situation, always having in mind that it is our duty to be the best we can. The other meaning of religion is a belief in supernatural.

You also compare a number of "religions" to each other. i am a bit preoccupied hearing true christians thrown into the pot with islam and others. Usually a religion is limited most by its founders. You will see the ugly misconceptions of them shine through even thousands of years afterwards. Often times, religion is also self-correcting (e.g. many muslims do not believe in killing though it is a clear and eternal commandment). The eastern "religions" you mentionned are truly superior to most other religions, but, as you said yourself, those are not religions at all. They are philosophies. The Tao te Ching, which i have read at least 3 times myself, you say, contains more wisodm than the Bible, but almost every thought in it is contained in the Bible (mostly Proverbs and Ecclesiasties, often times a little more practical in expression), written even 300 years before the Tao. Many people don't realize the depth of the Bible because they read bad translations like the KJV (i recommend AMP for daily reading).
i myself study the theories and logic of buddhism, taoism (minus the fables and superstitions), and i find almost all contained in the Bible.

Then your conclusions about history are just wrong. Interestingly, every single "proof" that has been brought forth to disproof the bible 200 years ago has been disproven today (take the Hittites for example, which was THE major argument against the Bible in 18th century). Same thing is happening all the time. Also, if you want to know how the first church came into existence and how it conducted, read the book of acts. If you would know how "theologians" and "historians" come up with their conclusions they so firmy express, you would get vomit cramps for the rest of your life. Basically all they do is proclaim their funny ideas they had while reading fiction. If you present some real arguments based on logic and data, they will just refer to their title and claim to be the ultimate authority of truth. Trust me, i experienced it first hand.
This is the vast majority of those "scientists" (One example is the prestigious "Jesus Seminar", now whoever calls that scolarship must be an idiot. it would be safer to play poker and let the winner decide what is truth). Ask yourself, why did all these christians die for their faith, if it was as undefined, unimportant and fluffy as you say it was? They died for it because they were convinced to the depth of their heart that it is the perfect truth they die for. That is the first church. Trust me, you did not find it yet. It is also still alive today. Make no mistake about it.

Then i am unertain of what exactly you understand as a fundamental christian. i don't think you are referring to the original (classic) definition.

Also you said there was no evidence for Christ's existence. That also is a refuted claim that no scientist holds any longer, as they had to abandon their position under the pressure of too much evidence.

And yes, modern fundamentalism (if i understand what you mean by that) ruins lifes, as well as legalism, over-protection, and a lot of other things. But Jesus was no fundie, and he did not discriminate sinners. The only people he discriminated were those that claimed to be holy/religios/knowledgeable/better/pure, but were not. Hypocrites. That's all. This originates from his interest in truth. Hypocrites are contrary to truth.

If you measure truth by relative success of nations, you are clearly using the wrong measurement. Allnations are wrong and corrupt. Just as all people are.

So, i am not looking for an argument, but these, among other things, are some of the things that are a matter of definition and that you can't just deny.

Answer me one question though: Lived to the very extreme and in full originality, which faith/philosophy/religion/... is best for
1) A person itself
2) The close social environment of that person
3) All persons that come in contact with that person
4) The rest of the world

To me, the true and uncorrupted christian faith is far superior to all other candidates. That is the reason i became a christian. My faith does not limit me in any way, but it encourages me to do the best i can, and to love others, and to produce peace.
Jesus is an authoritative God. In fact, he is the only truly authoritative God i have ever heard of. All fieldsof science that touch upon the human himself agree that the very most healthy setting for a human is an authorative one. Look it up, get a book about raising kids or about helping psychologically ill people. Or about being an effective prison guard, or company boss, or or or. They always end up at the same conclusion. Authoritative treatment. It is simply what we are.
That is Jesus. He demands all we can give, but he also gives as much as we can take.
Jesus is the one true God of the Bible.
peshitta_enthusiast Wrote:I'm also doing some incredible research now about the writings of the big-wigs of the early church, like Clement and Marcion. Eye-opening stuff. We'll need an iGod2 soon! <!-- s:biggrin: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/biggrin.gif" alt=":biggrin:" title="Big Grin" /><!-- s:biggrin: -->
There is nothing to gain from marcion. He was a proud hypocrite that (kind of) claimed to be the only origin and measurement of truth. Study him, but only as a bad example. Nothing he said was accepted outside of his own church, and he had no real influence whatsoever.
Jesus is the one true God of the Bible.
peshitta_enthusiast Wrote:I'm also doing some incredible research now about the writings of the big-wigs of the early church, like Clement and Marcion. Eye-opening stuff. We'll need an iGod2 soon! <!-- s:biggrin: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/biggrin.gif" alt=":biggrin:" title="Big Grin" /><!-- s:biggrin: -->

Maybe a bit of self-reflection would not be harmful my friend. You still sound the same as before: "I got the truth."

What I see, is a enthusiast guy, who is on a path of discovery, but you'll just find out that history and humanity is enslaved to selling 'truth' which constantly changes.

Maybe next year, you'll tell us that iGOD was a mistake indeed, and that it is time for iGOD2 or 3 <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->

About claims about Christ. It does not shock me that there were 'messiah-like' people before Jesus. Some words even may not be unique, however, not the words Jesus spoke are unique, it's his total message and personality.

No other human, has credentials like he does, to claim to be an avatar of the God who created us.
Further I won't comment anymore on this subject.

Have peace my brother, but I would suggest not to waste bandwith about atheism on this forum.
Wow, lots of questions, here goes!

""For example, you seem to say there is no God.""

Not true, I don?t say that at all, and that?s not what atheism is. I?m very open to the idea of some sort of god, just haven?t seen convincing evidence that it isn?t Zeus or Shiva or Allah etc. So my position is not a negative one, it is one that is intellectually honest. I?m open to all of them, but won?t believe either of them without evidence.

Just about all else you said can apply to Allah and other gods as well as Yahweh (creator of the universe, internal revelation, emotion, people dying for their faith etc).

As for my statement that there is no evidence for Jesus, that statement holds. Though it is controversial as so many believe in his existence, the only "evidence" is written texts from decades and centuries after, much of which are edited, fraudulent, and promoted by people who have every motive to lie. And again, with this sort of "evidence" you could "prove" any religion true.

""Answer me one question though""

I?d love to answer but it really is irrelevant to whether a religious claim is true or not. Buddhism was voted on by people of many different religions (including Catholicism) as the world?s best religion. That doesn?t make Buddhism true. Islam may be at present one of the most violent religions (the OT religion is just as violent, if not, more so). That doesn?t make it false.

And your own answer to the question is ambiguous; if you refer to literalist christianoty , much crime has been done in the name of the literal Jesus. As for Gnostic Christianity? That seems like a far more peaceful and uniting religion.

I do agree though that Christianity can be a wonderful religion. I have the honesty to say though that brotherly love, unity and peace can be believed in without needing to believe in a literal Jesus or a literal Yahweh (who often preached hate, segregation and war). Hence my position as a Christian atheist. Many of the earliest Christians were.

"There is nothing to gain from marcion"

History says otherwise. He was a Marcionite of course, who had many similarities to the Gnostics ? and Gnosticism was massive. He produced the FIRST NT canon. This canon included what was essentially a "stripped down" version of Luke and ten Pauline epistles. The curious thing is, there is no evidence for the existence of these books BEFORE Marcion?s canon. The more I look at it, the more it looks like our traditional NT canon (which isn?t universally accepted by all Christians even today) was half written by a "heretical" Christian.

It may be a shock, but it was indeed Marcion who produced the FIRST NT canon, and thus the "original" NT. A horrendous thought for those that hate "heretics", but one that is corroborated by history.

Marcion also shows what many early Christians thought of Judaism and the OT. That it is evil and should be kept separate from the wonderful (and rather Eastern) messages of Jesus. Keep in mind it weren?t the Gnostic Christians who tortured and killed orthodox/catholic Christians en masse and burned their texts. It was the other way around. You could say these "heretical" Christians were more Christian, more Christ-like, than the "real" Christians.

""The Tao te Ching, which i have read at least 3 times myself, you say, contains more wisodm than the Bible, but almost every thought in it is contained in the Bible ""

Perhaps you are right. It's just hard to find in between the "kill your relatives who leave the faith" and the "kill all the baby boys but keep the young virgin girls for yourself" biblical verses. Not only is the dao de jing full of practical wisdom, it also lacks such atrocities.

At the end of the day, it really all comes down to evidence for me. If there was evidence, I would accept Jesus and Yahweh. But there is ZERO evidence for their existence, and PLENTY against it.

Zero evidence for: all we have of Jesus are religious writings written decades and centuries after the supposed events. Nothing from during his time or a few years after. You can?t always trust what?s in the papers today, let alone what was thought decades after the events! Also, modern Jewish archaeology, with every motive to try and prove the bible true, has produced virtually no support for the biblical stories, and plenty of evidence against it (such as the twisted exodus story potentially based on a totally different event centuries earlier, and the Canaanites being Israelites, not conquered by them as the bible says).

Plenty of evidence against: Semitic hierarchy of gods, biblical verses showing Yahweh is not the chief god, but only the god of Israel, evidence that some sort of mythical Jesus was around decades before and even decades after the supposed events with details of a "literal Jesus" coming 100+ years later!

""Maybe next year, you'll tell us that iGOD was a mistake indeed""

I honestly find that doubtful; I urge you to read the book. You probably shouldn?t comment too much about it when you haven?t read it. I explain the facts (that generally lean against religious beliefs) and I demonstrate the lack of evidence for religion. I show my openness to ALL gods/religions but won?t accept any without evidence. And of course atheism is not an ideology, it doesn?t show you what the person believes, so can't be "wrong". It is simply the lack of belief in a personal god.

"Have peace my brother, but I would suggest not to waste bandwith about atheism on this forum."

I was asked why I no longer believe. And I answered. I have no intention of forcing my "nasty atheistic views" on anyone or offending anyone either. If anyone does want to know more on the things I have said here, do take a look at my book iGod which has links also to many scholarly works that go into more detail, and feel free to discuss with me by email anytime as well. I would gladly share what I have learned with anyone who is interested.

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)