The Lost Gospels
Documentary presented by Anglican priest Pete Owen Jones which explores the huge number of ancient Christian texts that didn't make it into the New Testament. Shocking and challenging, these were works in which Jesus didn't die, took revenge on his enemies and kissed Mary Magdalene on the mouth - a Jesus unrecognizable from that found in the traditional books of the New Testament.
Pete travels through Egypt and the former Roman Empire looking at the emerging evidence of a Christian world that's very different to the one we know, and discovers that aside from the gospels of Mark, Matthew, Luke and John, there were over seventy gospels, acts, letters and apocalypses, all circulating in the early Church.
Through these lost Gospels, Pete reconstructs the intense intellectual and political struggles for orthodoxy that was fought in the early centuries of Christianity, a battle involving different Christian sects, each convinced that their gospels were true and sacred.
The worldwide success of Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code sparked new interest, as well as wild and misguided speculation about the origins of the Christian faith. Owen Jones sets out the context in which heretical texts like the Gospel of Mary emerged. He also strikes a cautionary note - if these lost gospels had been allowed to flourish, Christianity may well have faced an uncertain future, or perhaps not survived at all.
I think it is pointless to engage into gnostic texts etc., without having read the basics of C. G. Jung. The documentary does, however, a fine job (without reference to C. G. Jung who explained most of the gnostic literature in the terms of the Old and New Testament). Certain confusions arising towards the end of the documentary (like, for example, the construction of 'two gods' ) could have been avoided.
Within the first ten minutes he proved himself to be a person more intent on creating his own narrative than exploring the truth. If he indeed knows his subject then he would have been embarrassed to say that any of the lost gospels says that Jesus kissed Mary on the lips. It simply is not there; the sentence was not finished, the parchment had been destroyed. He could have kissed her on the hand or on the cheek. He is either totally ignorant of the subject or is creating the narrative to suit himself; either way it is incorrect. Dishonesty does not a documentary make.
If you watch from 30-35 minutes, you'll see there's nothing dishonest or misleading in the presentation. It's openly discussed the missing parchment, a possible reading of it, and what it may mean or not mean.
God never wrote anything. It was those who were inspired by God to write their interpretation of personal revelation and or tell the stories down through the ages. The Jews did a remarkable job at recording everything from time to family bloodlines to history. I am Christian but that is as far as I go when it comes to "fundmental" beliefs. I do study ...but not the way most do. I do not stick to listening to perversion from the pulpit nor do I give my "tithe" to line the pockets of a storehouse holder. I didnt find the truth until I was 40...and I wasnt looking or attending a church building. We all play a role in God plan. There had to be a Judas or else Jesus never would have been nailed to that cross. We study through playing devils advocate...Satan means adversary..not a being persey..but a way of thought and action. Know your enemy.
Well it’s a shame you don’t understand tithe. God didn’t say because you think you know better than me to not line the pockets of the holder, you are to do what God says to do!! If a person decided to line his pockets then that’s between that person and God! You have an excuse not to give God what he already owns! Surely you do not think God needs your money do you. Others do and it’s an act of obedience.
OUTSTANDING Documentary! Thank you so much. Also, thank you for covering the Marcion part. I needed to know more about him and thanks to your work I have. Blessing to you...
I've read it all, Old, New, Apocrypha... Have faith in your ability to tell right from wrong, truth from lie.
I have to almost laugh as the history Channel, those that are secular who do not even read the bible try to explain an understanding of the New Testament. To go on the fact that Constantine had the writtings of the Bible brought to the masses. If one reas the "Trail of Blood" one can see the path of each denomination. Constantine had four scholars go through the writtings. What was important, was those that did not "lead" to Christ and his teachings were not included. The History Channel basically eluded to that the Bible was written is is the basis of the Catholic Church, I disagree, the changing of the Bible, when King Corinthian came to power he changed the meanings to appease his position as that of a man and then is when the political understanding of the Bible takes a twist, to the Catholic Catechism. The pure writings of the New Testament is not regulated by the Catholic church. Which is implied by the History Channel! The fundamentalist and Evangelical faith, reads right from scriptures, and cross references the scriptures. That all man come to the Father through the Son and only through the Son. No, priest can tell you your sin are forgiven, no priest can tell someone that he is righteous and in the family of God on their say by rituals nor can they put themselves in the place of Christ. Peter did not "build" the idea of the Catholic church, he was to preach the gospel to the Jew and Paul to take the message to the gentiles. We need no outside source to have a personal relationship with God through Christ. First and only we are to be born again, that is to accept Christ as our personal Savior by repenting, grace through faith. Read the words of God, it is all there. God Bless and keep you, through the name of Jesus Christ our Lord..Amen
I discovered years ago that the "History" channel had a hidden agenda to undermine the validity of the Gospel. It has a host of documentaries attempting to confuse believers by sounding factual. I no longer watch the channel. I do wonder who runs the network. Satan himself maybe?
Does anybody know the name of the music played at 0:26:03 (for a very short time). I have tried requesting this info from the BBC but have received no reply and am hoping there may be somebody out there who knows.
Try Misa Criolla by Ariel Ramirez
Wow. Thank you so much. It has been over a year since I asked the question. Thank you for taking the time to reply, it is really very kind of you....you have made my day!!!!!
Best wishes
Michael
That was interesting.
@Lonzel Watts
Your comments to me was rather enlightening and uplifting, I must say, you were not rude at all, because if you were, I would not have responded to you, because I am a mature person who likes to engage in intelligent comments. You said that my opinion on who is or is not a Christian does not matter as the definition speaks for itself was so true, because I was not giving my own opinion, but rather was expressing exactly what the definition showed [1] It said professing belief in Jesus as Christ. The bible said no man can call Jesus the Christ but by the Holy Ghost and There are three kinds of believers [1] the unbeliever [2] the make believer and [3] the real believer, the real believer does not believe with their body or their spirit they believe with their soul, The bible said the soul that sinneth or disbelieveth shall surely die [that is the second death] and the only way to believe with your soul is to receive the new birth. Jesus said except a man be born again he cannot see or enter the kingdom of God. That is the reason why so many cannot find God, It is because of a lack of the new birth, which is definition number [3].
Manifesting the qualities or spirit of Jesus; Christlike. Now there no way someone can become Christ like, without the new birth, Paul said I live but yet not I but Christ that liveth in me. For Christ to come and live in us it will take [1] Genuine repentance, [2] Baptism in the name of Jesus Christ and [3] Receiving the genuine Holy Ghost that will give you that spiritual birth by experience.
Good Bye for now Anthony.
Merriam Webster defines Christian simply as "one who professes a belief in the teachings of Jesus Christ." That's it. No more. So spare us the doctrinal crap.
@ Lonzel Watts
What is a Christian? To me that is a very important question, because the only way you can become one, you have to first know what it is. Let us look at when they were first called Christian, Acts 11:26 “And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.” Because the very life that they were living, and manifesting was the literal life of Jesus Christ.
As I have said before a Christian is one who possesses the literal life of Jesus Christ and that life is an overcoming life, that life is also eternal, it has no beginning so therefore is has no end, it overcomes hell, death and the grave. The lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes and the pride of life. This is sex, the love of money and popularity. The three great strongholds and the three great temptations of the Devil.
There are millions today that have no control over their sex life, then there are those who will do anything for money and there are those who are selling their souls to the devil just to become popular. But finally there are those who are having the victory in Christ Jesus. These are the ones that the devil hate. But these are the ones that God love and is in full communication with, the overcomers.
Going to church does not make you one, same as going to the hospital does not make you a doctor, just as flying in an aeroplane does not make you a pilot. You become one [that is a Christian] by a spiritual birth.
So you believe in the devil, do you? So you believe that it is impossible to treat a patient or fly an airplane without experiencing a spiritual rebirth (that's what you wrote in your conclusion). So an intellectual misfit like you has the temerity to tell others what they should or should not want, what they should or should not do. Who, the hell, do you think you are?
Chris·tian (krschn)
adj.
1. Professing belief in Jesus as Christ or following the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus.
2. Relating to or derived from Jesus or Jesus's teachings.
3. Manifesting the qualities or spirit of Jesus; Christlike.
4. Relating to or characteristic of Christianity or its adherents
Not to be rude, but your opinion on who is or is not a Christian does not matter as the definition speaks for itself. The Catholic church is/was a very strong determining factor on how just about all other Christian churches practice and even believe today. Not sure what denomination or sect you belong to, but I'm pretty sure the Catholic church had a hand in some (probably most) of what you believe yourself, weather you know it or not or want to admit it or not. Do your research and keep your personal feelings out of it because they really don't fit into the equation.
@ Jody Annan
Yes you are right that fornication in the biblical terms mean the worship of others or false deities. But that is spiritual fornication, like in the book of Revelation 17:2 With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication. What I was speaking about however, is natural fornication as in the book of Corin. 6:13 Now the body [is] not for fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body. Also it said. Nevertheless, [to avoid] fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. So to say that Jesus had a sexual relationship with Mary is really absurd. That's why i will reiterate again, that those manuscripts is call the lost Gospel and rightfully so that why they was not found in the canon of scriptures.
No, that's not the reason. You obviously have not read anything about the history of the bible or the various doctrines. No that it will do any good, but I suggest that you read Bart Ehrman's "The Lost Christianities" before you blather on about something you know nothing about.
copyright infringement my ass
okay clearly this documentary is mainly for Christians but denomination Roman Catholics and strong old believing Catholics not the new age Catholics.
So this clearly does not apply to all Christians because every single religion bible is wrote different than the first original bible which was published in the 1600s after that the Catholics tampered with every single bible printed. read who printed and translated the king James version Christians bibles. it was a catholic. not christian don't know, why though.
i dont know if im reading you correctly, but, catholics are christians
cathlolics are christians? on what facts do you base your assumptions?
Catholics are Christians, they are a sect of Christianity. Just like Baptists, Methodists, Pentecostals, and so on...
i found the documentary and comments interesting, both telling half truths depending on which angle one want to see. new vs old testaments. one fact remain unexplored. maybe if we try to understand the origin of the old testaments in relation to africans might help, i believe they are the source and creators of the old testaments and if we take time to concentrate on ancient africa and its culture and people, we might understand better both the origins and who christ was both as a man and spirit. these people are the origins and founders of spirituality and might make sense to refer to these cultures if we want to have a better understanding of modern religions and how they evolve. we will be wasting time if we do not start from the roots..............
What a strange comment. The older African culture was not the start of judeo christian myth, it was born from the pagan religions in the millennium before modern era or so.
The people interviewed for the documentary are the foremost scholars in biblical history, I'm fairly certain they're not just blindly looking past the origins of christianity. Many of them do not consider Jesus to have been a historical figure, any more. He is not mentioned in a single piece of history outside of what early christians started writing 70-100 years after common era (or Jesus' magic birthday). This stuff is well documented. Instead of making broad guesses, why not actually read the information we have?
Correction. Jesus is mentioned briefly by Lucian(125-180).
But you're right about the older African culture.
i believe the poster was referring to north africa, which is also part of the middle east. not sure , though. the term "middle east" was born out of the US military, so its use today is overrated.
for me this documentary was very disappointing. He seemed to spend more time justifying the churches rampant censoring of early material as "necessary to win" than delving into the details of the apocrypha. I was excited to watch this but really light weight in my opinion. I'm more interested in knowledge in all forms than the winning doctrine, I guess I'm just an elitist Gnostic, ay?
I think the point was more to show people why the church is organized as it is, not as much to open eyes to the historical failings of the non-divine christian writings. Seemed to be directed more towards people who are either very new to the idea of catholic doctrine or already well informed.
aight so besides the outfit, i still enjoyed the doc. some stuff i knew, some i didnt so it was worth the view for me. lost gospels sounds like something related to the mystery schools and such. also, i wonder if the higher levels of the clergy study these lost books, and leave the bible as is, to the masses, clergy or other.
disinformative and propaganistic
love the documentary but really wish this guy had the etiquette to remove his hat while indoors.
What clearly escapes Rationality is the reasoning why some human beings believe they should be acknowledged by a Higher Being, in the first place. What fantastic and dynamic action do these humans really deliver during their lives to distinguish themselves, in the animal kingdom?
Reproduction is a self serving act to fill one's life on earth, an unnecessary act but followed en masse in many societies, guaranteeing people have little time, interest and commitment to discovering the real purpose, mission and capabilities of humans on earth.
It is all very well placing emphasis on an ancient book, one that has survived many centuries, while other manuscripts and stories have been destroyed or adopted as self initiated and plagiarised by rampant conquerors. It is also all very well believing in a book without knowledge of Hebrew/Greek and refusing to carry out indepth research of numerous versions of the Bible. However should we not all be rocking the boat, in order to test the ark's stability, soundness and sea worthiness, before we jump on board?
How many people have ever pondered over Lady's Day falling on 25 March (Spring Equinox) and the addition of 9 months/moons, leading to a day near or 25 December, depending of course upon which calendar you use?
I dont think the issue is human reasoning, it is called faith. It takes faith and faith is dying in this world along with hope because of science and technology being more of a god than love, truth, patience, kindness...no...now there is this technology and it is no good. I have to use it, yes. However, I would rather not have this technology so we can all be together face to face face to face encounters with what you call humans or PEOPLE.
This ancient book has many things that can HELP people and to believe in a Higher Being is comforting, helpful, hopeful, joyful, promising and loving, if that is wrong - call me all the names you want - I know Jesus, He knows me. You may not ever be enlightened that way. I may be a Gnostic Christian. I am still searching my very own soul. I dont really care that everyone wants to disprove Jesus...hes stood the test of time...will you?
@tomregit
I do admire your sincerity, I always like to say to people, it is better you say that you are an atheist [someone who don't believe in God] than to say that you are a christian [ someone who possesses the life of Christ] and living your life like the devil, you will stand a better chance with God by saying that you don't believe, because the bible said to whom much is given much is required. For the life of Christ is an overcoming live, that overcame hell, death and the grave, that's why, we who profess to be Christians, must live an overcoming life also, because like begot like. Jesus said because I overcame the world you shall overcome also.
Now I will like to share something with you if you don't mind. Man is a triune being, meaning, man is Body, Spirit and Soul.
The Body has five senses which is see, tastes, smell, hear and touch, the Spirit has five senses which is reasoning, conscience, memory affection and imagination but your soul only has two, which is faith or unbelief. Now you don't believe with your Body or your Spirit you believe with your soul, the Bible said the Soul that sineth, that is, the soul that disbelieveth shall surely die. Now faith is a super sense that you receive when you experience the new birth and that is the only sense anyone can contact God with. That's why many people are trying to come in contact with God, but without faith, that is like trying to see without your eyes or trying to hear without your ears, which is impossible.
So until you experience the new birth by receiving God's word deep down in your soul, you can never have faith, and without it, you can never please God.
Now I will also like to talk about Jesus being God and how real the devil is but that will be in another blog, bye for now, Anthony.
Thanks for sharing your ignorance with us.
May be in those days immortality meant to be written about in a book, in a gospel included in the bible, the book of all books for that generation. It immortalized a person for etenity as they might have thought.
and it did....at least until now.
az
An excellent documentary regarding the history of the new testament, and the likelyhood as to why certain texts were included while others weren't. Roman support (Constantine)for the survival and growth of Christianity(history is written by the victors) should not be underestimated regarding power and control over the masses. With that said, and religious beliefs aside, I tend to believe that the message is more important than the man himself, giving credence to Doubting Thomas that if salvation exists at all, it flourishes from the ability to think anew, not repeating what came before without considering it's implications.
The first idea one must realize is that the council of nicea was implemented, not to define christianity , but to paganize the teachings of the early christian sects , and to manipulate return of the massses to the mystery religion of babylon.,unbeknownst to them of course,under the illusion of "christianity".which is still in practice to this very day by mainstream "christian" denominations.
The more Christians watch this kind of documentaries the better. Some of them may, hopefully, realize that the scriptures they believe to be the message of god are nothing but texts carefully chosen by some individuals to support certain political interests at that time. I particularly like the idea of two gods, put forth by Marcion of Sinope, because it expresses my own understanding that the god of the OT and the NT have to be two absolutely different entities.
I agree with, and respect what you said. The only point I wish to express differently is regarding the old and new testament. Marcion may well have been right, but his thoughts are as contradictory, as those who apposed him. In the truest sense, the old testament is monotheistic, because it was god himself responsible for all actions.(the flood, Sodom and Gemorah) In the new testament, anything bad is now attributed as the devil's work, polarizing god as 'only good'. This 'bi-polar reasoning' is not monotheistic in it's implications, and is driven by the idea of 'god is perfect'. The idea of attaching 'entities' to opposing attributes of potentiality is not logical nor monotheistic. Broken symmetry or 'imperfection' is why life or the universe exist to begin with. (if everything was good, how would you know it if you didn't have bad to compare to it?) I don't question whether god exists or not, but expecting a higher form of life to be 'perfect' is insulting expectation and destroys the purpose of all the life that supports it. In other words, wishing for something doesn't make it so, and in my humble opinion, corrupts the logic of understanding. (something to consider) Let me know what you think. In the mean time, best wishes, and live long and prosper!
I think the Old Testament is riven with tension between a belief in monotheism (belief in one God) and monolatry (the worship of one God to the exclusion of others, but not a denial of their possible existence). Some scholars believe that "El; El Eyon; and Yahweh" refer to different Gods, while others believe El and El Eyon are simply reverential titles conferred on Yahweh, which is also a kind of title more than it is a name (it means Lord) -- but either way there are a number of passages in the Old Testament in which Yahweh, either as monotheistic God of the Israelites or as a monolatric idol, uses the word "gods" in both a combative and a competitive tone and in doing so Himself acknowledges that while he is "the highest God (El Eyon)" he is not the only God. If looked at as a collection of historical texts, there is a progression from monolatry to monotheism, but I think, given that all texts are to be taken as legitimate and equal theisms, the famous and first Commandment: "You shall have no other gods before me" (literally "before my face") and Moses's Deuteronomy statement "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one, and which most Jewish/Christians see as a definitive statement of God's true monotheism, finds it's antithesis in other more monolatric statements such as "Do not worship any other god, for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God" (Exodus) and "Who among the gods is like you, O LORD? Who is like you--majestic in holiness, awesome in glory, working wonders?" (Exodus). It's interesting that this duality continues on into the New Testament, with Jesus straining against being two different types of god -- one purely divine, and the other a man who is somehow raised up to be divine; one judgemental and condemnatory and the other understanding and offering forgiveness and salvation. It is even more interesting to note that Marcion may have been trying to reconcile the duality of the Old Testament by denigrating it as simply a step towards the one, true God he believed Jesus ushered in by ultimately rectifying that duality by containing the dual nature of Judaism within Himself. Oh, boy, sorry, got carried away! lol! That was a long rant, wasn't it? Anyway....
No need to apologize. Your post was everything but a rant. In short, it's a fine analysis of the struggle between monotheism embodied in "The Lord, our God, the Lord, is One" and the henotheism in "Thou shall have no other gods before me." "Who among the gods is like you . . . "
Although your conjecture about Marcion has a lot going for it, until we uncover his works, we will have no idea as to its validity. It's a shame that everything about him is known only through the writings of his enemies.
I look forward to reading your future posts.
Thank you for your post. Regarding your reasoning about good and evil and the contradictions it entails in terms of Christianity as monotheistic religion, I understand your line of thinking and I find it logical. I personally believe that good and evil are human constructs and that the universal force which stands behind the evolution of life encompasses both good and evil but not in a way those who adhere to certain religions understand it.
As Marcion is concerned, I referred to his notion of two different gods only because he was the only one (that I heard of anyway) who, at the time, came up with this conclusion - the same one I reached when I read the OT and the NT.
Live long and prosper :)
the flaw i see in your reasoning is premise of your assumption that Gods attempts to cleanse the earth of the evil endeavors of mankind through the use of "natural" disasters is somehow in itself evil.
Since it is knowned that these Gospels really existed along with the writers ...why not include them in the bible of the 21st century? The rulers of the past no longer rule, the writings should be read equally as part of the past.
az
MY humble apology. I meant hundreds and thousands of years apart. For example, take the books that Paul wrote and measure it with the books that Moses wrote.
Mr Robert, if education makes a man so arrogant please leave me with my common sense, and my broken English. However I thank you, for what you called, "constructive criticism" to my last post. It was once said, that you have to go through the hall of critics before you can reach the hall of fame.
The reason I was so passionate in my response to this documentary is because it's a bunch of lies. You can even see for yourself the big holes in the manuscript. Do you know what a big difference one word in a sentence could make? I had to change the word 'of' to 'and' in one my sentence, and what a big different it made. What I found also to be very absurd, is when they said that Jesus may have had a sexual relationship with Mary. Jesus said that no fornicator [that is having sex outside of marriage] shall enter the kingdom of heaven and one man who lived what he preached is our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
Last but not the least, the manuscripts are called the lost gospels and rightfully so, that' why they did not make their way into the canon of scripture in the Bible. Thank you.
The arrogance engendered by education stems from the enlightenment it brings, placing its recipients above ignorance, superstition and dogma and enabling them to winnow truth from lies and treat so-called common sense with a new profundity.
But there are some who will always be left behined.
Maybe as your lord, saviour, father, teacher, he might (if he was real) have preached what he lived with the benefit of hindsight rather than living what he preached. Like any parent will try to tell their children, learn from my experiences and don't make the mistakes I made. Usually a waste of breath but you have to try ! Anyway, if that is even possible it leaves room for him to have made all sorts of mistakes (and he did) and speak from experience. Don't forget he was at least half mortal and to err is human. Had he been faultless in every way, where would the lesson be. How would he have been able to demonstrait that you can become more than you are, a better person. Luckily for me, I am made of stardust and when i rot in the ground I will still be stardust. I will live forever, in a worms belly and then in a bird and a cat and a dog, and then maybe as drool. In the end its all drivel :)
what constitutes marriage in biblical terms? a marriage liscense issued by a goverment that was not formed yet when the bible was written and will no doubt be just a distant memory while the truth lives on for ever ?.fornication in biblical terms mean the worship of other or false deities.the biblical definition of marriage is when a man and a woman couple (under certain conditions) sexually. To say there is no chance Jesus coupled (although it was most probably NOT with a woman named Mary) is to ignore the importance of the continuation of bloodlines and progeny in the holy scriptures.
Wow! Talk about some that are so "pure" and "righteous"....let's hope YOU'RE not followed as a "false" prophets...and what will be said on Judgement Day....or do we just rot like worms? I'm not.
The Bible is a compilation of sixty- six books, written by forty different authors over a period of hundreds and thousands of years apart, it reveals the one goal and the one purpose of Almighty God, there is not a book like it in the world. It starts with Genesis which means seed and ends with Revelation which is Apocalypse meaning unveiling. All that started in Genesis will end up in Revelation. It started with Adam, Eve and Eden and it ends with Christ, the Bride and the Millennium. Showing that the same author of the book is the same author of creation: GENESIS CH 1:12 And the earth brought forth grass, [and] herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed [was] in itself, after his kind: and God saw that [it was] good. Every seed brought fort after his kind, and to this day that has never changed and will never change, what you sow is what you reap. It is the complete Revelation of Jesus Christ. Showing that the God who was above us, became Emmanuel, God with us. To the Holy Ghost, God in us, not three Gods but three offices or manifestation of the same God. It is also a book of prophecy, fulfillment and history showing us that there is a law in nature that always repeats itself. It also reveals to us what goes on in the spirit world,that there are two worlds the world seen and the world unseen. It also reveals seven dimensions [1] Light,[2] Matter [3]Time [4] Radio and Television which is the recording dimension [5] the region of the lost [6] the region of the bless and [7] where God sit on his throne. It's a complete book, it does'nt need any thing else to be added to it, because there is a curse for adding or taking any thing away from it. God Bless You
P S Constructive criticism please, Thank You.
You want constructive criticism. Well, all right, the documentary obviously went way over your head.
Do you want some more constructive criticism? If you were to read about the history of the bible, you would discover that it was written by men for political purposes and political purposes only--it is not the fairy tale you make it out to be.
Do you want some more constructive criticism? If you were to read about the history of the bible, you'd discover that no one knows how many authors were involved and that whoever they were, they did not live hundreds of thousands of years apart.
Do you want some more constructive criticism? If you were to read about the history of the bible, you would discover that it merely reflects the times in which it was written and the outlook of its authors.
Do you want some more constructive criticism? If you were to compare and contrast the synoptic gospels with known historical facts, you would discover how greatly they differ from each other not only as to the life of Christ, but also as to matters such as redemption, repentence, divinity.
Do you want some more constructive criticism? If you were to compare and contrast the apocryphal gospels (which, in case you didn't get it, is what the documentary is about) with canon and known historical fact, you would discover that there were different and differing Christianities, some of which the documentary detailed and all of which you obviously missed.
Do you want some more constructive criticism? Heed St. Augustine's warning not to take the bible literally.
Do you want some more constructive criticism? Improve your English.
Do you want some more constructive criticism? Stop blogging and start researching (read learning).
This is about as constructive as I can get in the face of an intellectual homunculus such as you.
@robertallen1,
Homunculus, huh?
Give me a sec, I'll add that to my MS-Word's orthograph corrector...
Damned MS-softy, it doesn't stop laughing...
Humm....
Pierre.
@Anthony Glaude,
After reading your text, I began to wonder if you ever been aware that on the mood that inhabited the most important "Revelation" author (For the part of the bible to which this word really refers to "End of times"), the one who really wrote it and not one(S) who fantasize having written it?
Ever heard of the effets of some wild mushroms on human being psychic? Else, is "Your" bible sensored for better endoctrinement as so many weird christians religions are?
However, just be reading you, I should have figured your reply before hand.
Pierre.
"hundreds of thousands of years"???
I can't be very constructive with people that are living in the paleolithic!
Neither can I, but look at all the televangelists, faith healers and little ID people. By the way, do you find anything intelligent in intelligent design?
"The Bible is a compilation of sixty- six books, written by forty different authors over a period of hundreds of thousands of years apart". Wow. This is incredible news to the world. Wow. Like.....wow. Thats incredible. Wow.
@ My Brit homonyme,
Come on! Can't you see that the poor man is in delirium tremens?
"Hundreds of thousands", hum?
Let's write this down just to view it properly....
To begin with, the bare mininum 100,000 years.
Minus ~ 2,020, date at which we know that someone named Jesus existed.
This while we know out of any shadow what so ever that anatomically modern humans originated in Africa about 200,000 years ago coze bones of humanoids were carbon dated.
The only thing there is to figure out in there is that one needs to understand that "Anthony Glaude" meant that the bible was written way before humanoids had any written language at hand?
Therefore, the bible was written by God himself!
The only other possibility would be that somewhere on planet earth, some mental sanatorium azylum give their patient access to the web?
Anthony Glaude, Anthony Glaude...
Pure French directly from France...?
I tough they didn't had no zealote religees over there.
Hummm, bizarre...
Pierre.
religions killed Jesus and his mensage, Jesus was one of the great rebels in history his divinity exists on his humanity, just try to follow his example.
Punks not dead! oi!oi!
I can see that this documentary went over your head. The accounts are so conflicting that we know next to nothing about the players or happenings. You and others like you need to read. Try "Lost Christianities" and "Forgery" of Bart Ehrman who appeared in the documentary.
I was reading all the comments, and was so sadden to read that no one defended the bible and the Lord Jesus Christ who was so viciously attacked by this documentary, which was another attempt to crucify and to assassinate the character of my lovely Lord and Savior, who died one of the most brutal death to save mankind from their sinful nature that the devil trap them into, but as the scripture said,"this is the condemnation that light is come into the world, but man rather darkness more then light, because their deeds are evil, and that evil means: loving their religious works more than the reveal truth and just like Cain they are being marked and separated from the present of God. Now just to think of not being able, to live in the present of God, at the end of your earthly journey, is something that the human mind will never be able to conceptualize, because only God can reveal that to them.
Having said that, I will like to shed some light on some things. One of the reason why the bible is such a hated book is that it is the only book that exposes the devil, his origin, his five I wills and his destruction and the book of Job ch.1 in the bible shows the full characteristics of the devil and how destructive he is, and the only life that can overcome the devil is the life of Christ, because the life of Christ is an overcoming life, that overcame hell, death and the grave. Now hell was not created for man, hell was created for the devil and his angles, but man is given a choice between eternal life and death, which is eternal separation from God, but some men will always choose death above life, because the devil blinds their mind from the truth. That why the bible ends with the devil and those who was deceive by him in the lake of fire.
@Anthony Glaude:
You are preaching about your invisible non-existence deities that you and others of your ilk have read in a man-made book of horrors called the OT, sad if you are propagating all this gunk on unsuspecting fellow humans that are more susceptible to these fairy stories.
Quit preaching, read the "comment policy" above and refrain spewing your id1otic unsubstantiated play of words, about trying to instill fear and guilt in us normal humans about all your hell-fire and your satans and demons that exist in your and most religious fundamentalists minds. It seems that you are not quite right in the head. GET HELP!
Wow,Razor.I see that preachy delusional dogma-saturated Christians are still on your "My Pet Peeves" list..I feel we've all been here before with this Gnostic business..always elicits the same reactions.Anthony does sound like a wacko Ned Flanders nutjob,but hey,in a way we all believe our own fantasy world.I'm not a guy who goes to malls at Christmas exposing the Santas as frauds while the kids are on his lap.What good does it do them?In a weird way I can't quite explain,I think we need guys like Anthony.If for anything,to give us an appreciation for rationale
Hello Anthony, This is another ramble about your faith. You vision the world and everything as how it was told and pictured upon you. Not how you thought and explored it yourself.
I'm not here to say God does not exist, or your 'church' / religion has caused so much pain and suffer upon this world, that maybe that would be the devils trick instead?..
But let's just say this, if i never heared of the bible, and preachers never found me to tell me about this god.. God would let me just die? and not grant me the eternal live you talk about, just because his preachers failed to reach me?... Doesn't seem quite right.
I can imagine the world was alot smaller when the bibletexts where written, it must've been quite flat to.. as i recall they believed.
So people back than really needed some support in form of a god..
All ancient civilisations and tribes had theirs, even heared of a tribe using the word sort of like 'god' as a word for 'unexplained'.. but back then they talked about a falling star, a lightning storm..
Now we've developed our knowledge, though there is still so much we don't know yet, but we are a curious being trying to learn more and more about this world we live in.. And the more we know the more mysterious and weird it gets sometime.. But our world expanded enormously.
And now we see, that almost everything they stated back then are a little different than they thought they where.
And it would be a little stupid of the us humans to hold on to the believes and ideas from people 2000 years ago. Since our whole world has changed completely.
sorry if i went a little off topic.
Obviously, this documentary went over your head--which is no great accomplishment. You don't know anything about your own Bible, but ignorantly defend it and criticize others for not doing as you do. This represents a new rise in your level of ignorance.
are u one person preteding to be two>> me thinks so
@Anthony Glaude,
So, according to you, God or any of his messenger need to be defended by human beings?
That is not what we seen through the last 1,500 centuries?
Pierre.
blind faith and fear mongering is all religion boils down to.
@ Anthony Glaude
I am an atheist for too many reasons explain. It just makes no sense to me. Since I can't prove my beliefs are true and I acknowledge that there is an infinitesimally small possibility that I might be wrong, perhaps I could be considered by some to be agnostic. However, the belief in a Devil is so childlike that, in this regard, I am an atheist. Jesus is not god and there is no Devil.
Yeah, you're going to die and go into the ground like everybody else. Where is heaven, anyway? Is it near Sirius 4? Hell must be REALLY small since no geological surveys have ever seen it.
I most certainly agree with your comments tariqxl. As an atheist I still enjoy the history of religion and how it affects mankind, despite all religions being based on myths, hearsay and fairy tales. The more I learn about religions the more I understand why I am a non-believer of any gods. My morality comes from common sense, not from something as lame as most of the Bible's ten commandments. As a humanist, I add my favorite Humanist Commandment which reads: "Use neither lies nor spiritual doctrine, nor temporal power to dominate and exploit others." A second humanist commandment: "Develop one's intelligence and talents through education and effort, in order to reach fulfillment and happiness, for the betterment of humanity and of future generations." As a finishing line; Next time a group of delusional people want to create a religion, make sure you bring a camera to show us your miracles.
In any events, the more I hear about religion, the more it appears to be sort of an enigma that only the so-called Gnostics in a transe can figure out.
Once they're out of their transe, they simply fogot!
There's ough to be some sort of God but it sure is none of the any religion may teach.
The only thing that comes to my mind is those tricksters mentionned in a general docu about the history of religion where those "Tricksters" organised tricks in public in order to get the peoples to beleive that the "Trick" was a phenomenon from a given God.
They show the relics of these magician "Tricks" in that docu.
These contractor magician were hired by emperors or their government.
I don't remember which docu it was...
Not much of a great evolution for humankind in that everyday life.
Since all of these "Holy Books" were manipulatedto the same degree as the official Gov. 9/11 comission was, we're sure are on our own.
And that is what human beings are already doing.
Pierre.
The gospels which made it into the canon say nothing about Jesus’ formative years, but the proto or infancy gospels, all from the second century and all apocryphal, do. It’s a shame these were not mentioned in this documentary which was otherwise informative if somewhat repetitious. I will focus on two:
In the Infancy Gospel of Thomas (not to be confused with the Gospel of Thomas treated in considerable detail in the documentary), the child Jesus breathes life into a dried fish which fares better than three humans (two children and a teacher) whom the child Jesus slays for one puerile reason or another and does not bother to resurrect. But all ends happily for eventually Jesus stops acting like a spoiled brat.
The earliest source of virgin birth is not in the canon, but in the apocryphal Infancy Gospel of James (which James is uncertain), the same gospel which apparently inspired the concept of the Immaculate Conception enunciated by Pius IX in 1854. This is a marvelous piece of storytelling which has Jesus born in a cave and hidden in a feeding trough from the wrath of Herod (who must have been about 5 at the time). But by far the best narrative relates to Jesus’ birth. Right after Jesus is born, a disbelieving midwife named Salome performs a virginity check on Mary and as a result, suffers severe burns on her hand (fingers) which are healed as soon as she professes her belief in the divinity of the child.
Think of what it would have done for (or preferably against) Christianity had these works been included.
All this and more can be found in “Lost Scriptures” by Bart Ehrman who appeared all too briefly in this documentary. I also recommend his other works such as “Misquoting Jesus,” “Fraud” and especially “Lost Christianities.”
Thank you, sir!! Information is our FRIEND! I also love the works of Robert Price. The Incredible Shrinking Son of Man is an absolutely amazing piece.
Thanks for the tip. Will check it out.
This guys clothing style truly throws me off...
But here is a real sermon, Sebastien. In everyday life, people are obsessed with appearances, religious uniforms, sexual appeal and materialism; causing them to blindly ignore the depth of another human being's soul, intelligence and wisdom. How often have ridiculous theatrical clothes and presentations of fraudulent people with buzz words, controlled the masses?
The old proverb comes to mind, never judge a book (even a car), by it's cover. If you do, prepare to be stereotyped yourself. If many shallow people were truly blinded, they would cease focusing on appearances(including cars) and skin colour. Over to you, priest Pete Owen Jones......
Crododile Dundee searching for the lost Gospels.
az
Or Indiana Jones ?
I certainly prefer that to the suit and tie style. Although when a guy dresses this way, he should not wear tight underwear which apparently this guy does. lolol
az
Thats his holy pants, all the Church of England boys wear them. Apple catchers :)
"He kissed her on her ______ many times."
I'm curious as to why he decided the missing word is mouth. Why not forehead or hand? His jumping to conclusions makes him lose credibility to me. I don't care either way, I just thought it was an interesting stretch.
He clearly stated it was a conjecture, not a decision, not a stretch. I am curious to find out if all of the subject word is missing or only part of it.
I like watching documentaries like this sheerly because it teaches us about history and the social structuring and psychology of people living in antiquity. But it has to hit you just how pathetically nimble our species is that through out our history we've changed beliefs and deities to suit what we want out of a god. Whats worse is we can see this in effect yet still believe these stories. It makes me hang my head in shame at how after 2000 years of supposed growth, learning and understanding we still allow fairy tales to shape us as a society.
last comment.
the lost gospels?, i thought they all were lost.
wow jesus is f**n brilliant.
gospel of thomas.
"if something is in you and you bring it forth it will save you.
if something is in you and you do not bring it forth it will destroy you"
WOW!! 'something'..... what does jesus mean by something???
hey now its my turn to play.
'if somewhere, someone does something. then they will be blessed.
however when nothing is done by someone in no time then they will be destroyed'.
pearls of wisdom are fun to make up. .
Hahah I should've waited till the end of the docu to say the part about whether or not he believes it personally or not.
Love the fact that there's music from "Kingdom Of Heaven" at 59:50.
But this was actually a very well put together documentary with very compelling evidence, and I enjoy the fact that this is all put together by an actual priest and a lot of what he is saying does go against common beliefs of today, now whether or not he believes them is a question I cant answer, But I like the fact that he's not being so narrow minded as a lot of people are or perceive the church to be. I'm not exactly a religious person myself, but i hate ignorance, and not the unintentional kind, but the neglectful kind. I love watching documentaries of this kind because they make people think more and question a lot of their fundamental ideas.
If you have enjoyed this documentary, watch the 2003/7 History Channel's Books "Banned From The Bible" series.
PART ONE covers The Life of Adam and Eve; The Book of Enoch; The Book of Jubilees; The Infancy Gospel of Thomas; Proto-Gospel of James; The Gnostic Scriptures of Nag Hammadi; The Gospel of Mary; The Gospel of Nicodemus; The Apocalypse of Peter and Gnostic Apocalypse of Peter.
PART TWO covers The Testament of Solomon; The Zohar (The Book of Splendor); The Alphabet of Ben-Sira; Joseph and Aseneth; The Septuagint; Bel and the Dragon; The Acts of Peter; The Acts of Paul and Thecla; Mar Saba letter and The Secret Gospel of Mark and The Gospel of Judas.
no fact outside Archetypal understanding in and of its self contains no fact.
A documentary every fundamentalist could learn from--if only these creatures had the ability to learn
There, as you are also a fundamentalist, I couldn't agree with you more!
A (usually religious) movement or point of view characterized by a return to fundamental principles, by rigid adherence to those principles, and often by intolerance of other views (and opposition to secularism.)
If we take the religious aspect of the definition of fundamentalist...i would have to agree with you.
az
True to form, you write something idiotic. You know nothing about me and yet you describe me as a fundamentalist.
Just a suggestion,,, look up ( Hirsch ) and his famous quote...Both of you should...Take it or leave it.
@norlavine:
You are persistent, good for you, keep stoking the coals, you never know, love will find a way, I think that robertallen1 is teetering on the edge of a tempestuous relationship with you, must be the springtime in your area. lol
Please give me some credit for taste!
Wow this was so interesting. As an athiest this makes some great ammo >:)
Seriously? You can't win the 2/3 of the worlds total population of theistic believers...
Just solar mythology nothing more nothing less. The books they chose to put in the bible were nothing more but to control the weak, Goddamn they did a good job!
good show.
...and let the bible thumper' s attack begin...
So if religious books were cherry picked for inclusion and exclusion, does the sequencing of the books in the Bible reveal anything of significance, similar to ShakesPEARe's plays in the four folio editions, which were clearly not printed in chronological order?
If there was an Old Test and a New Test, can a correlation be drawn between the first four books in the Old Test: Gene, Exodus, Levi and Numbers versus the New Test of Math, Mark, Look and John?
In those days, Samurai Sudoku, Cryptic Crosswords and join the dots had no audience, so the only channel of puzzlement would have been through old manuscripts, such as the Bible. Time to watch..............
I think there's like a 1500 year difference between the old and new testaments... 'tis why I take the New Testament with many more grains of salt than the old one, because, by then the religion had had time to settle-in.
But I think there's a story to be told just in the chronology of the gospels, themselves, in that the first three (Mark/Matthew/Luke) all show a progression of placing ever more emphasis on Jesus' birth and resurrection, and progressively less on his life and his mission. So, by the time John rolled around, he must have been so disgusted by all the religiosity that he dropped the whole birth/resurrection part altogether, and just focused on Jesus' life. This has a tendency to really piss-off Christians when ever someone tells the story of Jesus based on the Gospel of John; as in The Passion of Christ, and Jesus Christ Superstar. Although, I think the latter is just because they hate Rock & Roll. :-)
Try more like 2100 years. That's about the time between the solar ages Taurus, Aries(Moses time), Pisces(Jesus time) and so on and so forth.
This doc its a reminder to all of us, that no matter what personal view we have about religion and the bible in particular, the most important fact is that what has reached us today, is a product of mans imagination, understanding, and most importantly, the spoils of a war of words and concepts.
A good watch if your mind (soul to some), is open to new understandings and challenges.
I had to click this just to see where Jesus kissed Mary Magdalene.. Love your intros, Vlatko! LOL!
I have friends who actually believe God dictated the bible to a lot of people but only the real significent stuff was included . They say that Moses spoke to a burning bush . I explained the bush was what Moses was smoking and thats why it was burning . Religious people what would the world be like without them .
probably just as righteous
@wheelnut53:
I have lots of friends and acquaintances who believe the same. But the conclusion I came to from actually reading the texts was.. that Moses climbed up on a mountain; stared into a raging volcano --"as though it were a bush that burned in a great furnace, but was not consumed"-- and realized that all the gods of Egypt had nothing on this dude!
Consider for a moment, that a volcanic eruption at the head of the Nile would explain most --if not all-- of the plagues of Egypt. A volcano is also one of the few known phenomenon on this earth which can blow winds strong enough to part oceans.
Interestingly enough, there is a volcano at the head of the Nile, near the mouth of the Red Sea, called Erte 'Ale, which has been active for about the past 15,000 years. Certainly it has been a more influential god over Egypt than Isis could have ever hoped to be.
~~~
It helps not to take ancient text literally; otherwise, one might be tempted to believe their authors were all just pathological liars. Bear in mind that there was no such thing as science back in the day. Books like the Bible are stories written by monkeys trying to explain events which they no way of understanding. They may or may not have value to archaeological research. But to simply dismiss them offhand because one believes preachers are to blame for all of the problems in this world is an act of willful ignorance, and verges on extremism.
It's not 'willful ignorance or extremism' to realize that since a document could not have been written by a god, it's a load of bunk. Whether it's pretty prose or not is not the point. Philosophy, possibly; word of god, gimme a break. This god didn't know anything more than the people of the time did; no knowledge of electricity, germs, the cosmos (even though this god was supposed to have invented it).
I highly doubt Moses saw any volcanoes (pretty difficult to get close to one) and I also doubt if any volcano 'parted the Red Sea'. Now, if you want to surmise that someone seeing a volcano invented hell, that's an easier assumption.
what about an earthquake creating a tsunamai like the one that hit thailand etc the tide went out then the wave came rushing in and killed people if the escaping ppl went across as the waters parted and the following army was destroyed by the incoming wave it was an amazing "co- incidance " or stroke of luck...
There is actually a much more likely and easier to imagine explanation, it never happened. That's right the whole exodus story, never happened according to modern historians. Maticulous records were kept in Egypt of which nations they conquered and took as slaves, Isreal and the jews are never mentioned in such a context, nor are the plagues or the exodus events. Now these were supposedly huge events that affected the entire nation, babies dieing and people starving, rivers turning to blood. Yet not one scribe, priest, or citizen in Egypt wrote a single word about it. Not one visiting person went home and told everyone about the crazy things he had seen? We would expect to see a flood of material to support such wide spread unnatural phenomenon, yet the only reference to these events just so happens to have been written by the very people it proclaims to be the chosen ones. the heros of the story.
They now theorize that a small group of Caanaanites may have been taken as slaves, which was a common practice for Egypt and other countries at ths time, and later escaped back into southern Caanaan. The exodus story was then made up in an attempt to give the peoples of Caanaan a common history of struggle and eventual victory due to being the chosen peoples of God. The leaders of this small independant state were perched between the two dominant super powers of their time, Egypt to the south and Mesopotamia to the north. This new identity as God's chosen people coupled with the strict laws outlined in the Torah (Old Testament) would allow them to build a stronger more organized society that managed to survive even until the present.
This was the debut of monotheism, one god, one way to worship him, one identity as a people. Up until now one of the biggest struggles any nation faced was internal war due to peoples worshipping different gods, even if they all belonged to one pantheon. Greece struggled with this issue, Rome had its problems with it, etc. Even if nations managed to avoid this issue everyone still worshipped in their own way, there was no organization to it, therefore it wasn't a very effective tool for controling people. However, with one God and a set way to worshiip him, even a preist caste, now you have the perfect tool to organize a nation with, to control peoples passions amd desires, to control everything. Even though I am an atheist and despise organized religion, I think it definitely played an important roll in the evolution of human society. It is like a set of training wheels, it helped us learn how to ride off the sidewalk, but we have long since out grown it.
@wald0
couldn't have been said better
technically Akhenaten debuted monotheism at Amarna in Egypt's 18th dynasty. Some of his language was even used in the old testament. but i completely agree with the rest - about how what they wrote was for solidarity's sake.
i've heard people trying to explain why the jews were the chosen people, and it blows my mind... jews wrote a book that favored jews, and glorified jewish history. is it that hard to understand? XD
Well the whole theory is based on circumstantial evidence, so I am not sure it happened specifically like that. I will say that due to the research I have done and the opinions I have encountered while in the fields of theology and history, the origin and motivation for the old testament will likely turn out to be very similar to this hypothesis, imho. Actually Zoroastrianism predates Akhenaton's rule, and it was monotheistic as well as dualistic, very similar to Christianity. Besides most scholars would say Akhenaton's cult was more henotheistic than monotheistic, he himself being associated with the god Aten who existed firmly within the Egyptian pantheon. That said your point remains valid, Judaism was not the birth of monotheism. I am not sure why it is portrayed to be often, I suppose because it is the roots of western religious tradition. Thanks for your correction, and comment.
no worries - i didn't know that Zoroastrianism was considered monotheistic, though. good to know and Interesting how it is more like modern 'monotheistic' religions with one god and many other sub saints, demons and angels, who would have been considered gods in a polytheist setting.
Judaism is considered the birth of monotheism probably because history is written by the victorious ^^ same with the stories of the old testament - if you believe the bible you don't think to research into the myths that it was written from and think it is the final source for it's own contents.
"internal war due to peoples worshipping different gods, even if they all belonged to one pantheon"
Power was not placed in one God but distributed wisely among a number of Deities/Representatives both male and female, similar to the patronage of saints today. When religion drives the creation of a monopoly and autocracy, abuse of power and position will arise.
There's no reason to become alarmed,
and we hope you'll enjoy the rest of your flight.
By the way, is there anyone on board who knows how to fly a plane?
(Airplane!)
"Religious people what would the world be like without them ."
Exactly! Religious people are part of human civilization. These religious people have inspired millions and billions of people into accepting common beliefs of human ethics and the rule of law. Its ironic, but modern atheistic movement itself started in religion dominated societies of the western world. Rationally speaking, there would be no atheism without the existence of theism. :D
If you have a right being atheist, then being theist is also a human right. More than 2/3 of world population is theistic.
I don't think any atheist gives a shit what someone personally believes about God or gods, it's when those people try to make others believe it too, mostly be by force or brainwashing, that atheists get a bit miffed about. You can go on pretending your fairy tales actually happened, just don't try and use that c*** to run society.
"You can go on pretending your fairy tales actually happened, just don't try and use that c*** to run society."
I am sorry, if u misunderstood my last comment. I didn't mean to use force or brainwashing to make sure people still believe in ancient religions. In the Coldwar Era, both Soviet Union and China tried to enforce atheism by adapting it to state "religion" and persecuted all traditional religions in line with the prime marxistic ideology of communism; religion is the opium of society. Still after the collapse of the Union, and China moving away to more liberal economic and social policies, yet masses of educated and non-educated religious people still exist in both China and former USSR.
The point being made is that human psyche does not accept force of will upon itself. Even educated at the highest level, if one still wanna believe in supernatural stuff or divine meaning in life, that very individual has a right to do so. Call it genetically or culturally inherited. But evidence shows that all existing and non-existing societies of the world have always had people (more or less) practicing or atleast observing some kind of religious dogma. Eastern nations of China, Japan and Korea have traditionally had very few percentatge of true religious adherents among the total population. Yet the concept of belief in undocumented fairytales and other myths still exists in those very irreligiously dominant states.
i dont know if youre trying to get me to defend the soviet union or china in their policies, just because they were so called 'atheist' societies. That you could never do. They are guilty of exactly the same thing that i was against. Of course people should have the freedom to believe religiously whatever they want to. Just dont force us to believe it too, and don't use it to try and use those beliefs to run my country, for example, having the theory of intelligent design being taught in public schools, or making gay marriage illegal, etc. all those policies that come from peoples religious beliefs rather than coming from a place of reason.
Please don't get me wrong. I agree with you, but to play the devil's advocate, what about vice laws which clearly have their roots (if not their origination) in Judeo-Christian culture? And for that matter, what about laws against bigamy or usury?
well for me that doesnt hold much, because i think all drugs should be decriminalized if not legalized, as well as prostitution. Bigamy? ...meh, if someone really wants to put themselves through the torture of having more than one wife or husband, then go for it, aslong as all parties are happy with the arrangement then why should we stop them. As for usury i don't know too much about, but if its down to excessive interest on money borrowing, then i would have thought it would have been something a free market would have eventually sorted out themselves. I have no debts, no mortgage and no credit cards, for the reason i believe you should only spend what you have, but if you are going to get a loan then surely its up to the person to enter into an agreement where he is happy with the contract and interest payments. I honestly believe that making a lot of these vices illegal is doing more harm than good.
I basically agree with you, but a point:
Sometimes it's better to use credit than wait until you have the money. For example, when an item is on sale (and I mean really on sale) and you don't have the cash to buy it, if you wait until you have the cash, the price might go up and up, rendering the item forever out of your reach. Therefore, you would proably do better to purchase the item on credit, assuming you can afford the payments.
that's fair enough, i don't think credit cards shouldnt be about, just saying it's not something i do personally, and yes its left me missing out on a lot of things i would like to have bought, but i get always manage to get what i need just not what i want. But I am in a lucky situation to own my house outright with lots of land that i am able to grow a lot of my own food. So understand in the modern world, credit is a necessary for many people to survive, just not for me.
But it's amazing how perverted things become. In this day and age, all to often, bad credit or even discharge in bankruptcy is better than no credit at all and many financial institutions do not want to lend to people who have never had any credit. Yet, idiotically enough, these same financial institutions were giving out home loans to people who could not afford the payments, resulting in the financial crisis a few years back. You figure it out.
ha, yeah, it all seems crazy to me, just like religion, and as with religion, I just chose to not involve myself in any of it
The financial crisis was the result of credit and home loans like a person with AIDS dies of a cold. Do your research. Thanks!
I don't see where the argument is.
If you had read any books in your life, you would know with 100% certainty that the ideas in the ten commandments predated christianity by about 75,000 years.
I never wrote that Christianity was original, only that so many vice laws were inspired by it, either for good or bad.
Hey champ, let me help you. Atheism is the belief in science. Murdering millions of citizens in order to consolidate control of a country under a fascist government is......murdering millions of citizens in order to consolidate control of a country under a fascist government. If you can't see the difference; I pity you, your parents and your offspring. If you get the difference, don't use Russian state-sponsored murder and purges as an example of atheism.
and dont bring up hitler's christianity
Your spirituality is too hard hearted, obviously lacking in the pleasing taste from the fruits of His joy. Your opinion, per se..I pity your tastebuds, in hopes that one day your spirit will soar with the sweet flavor of His Word.
And just how do you know what "His Word" is? And by the way, who is He?