56% Paul and Luke

We were discussing another ignorant poster's claim that Paul was a "false" apostle and suffered from severe mental illness. sigh.

Before I get into the meat, let me share (only because misery loves company) some of the dregs first:

* Here is a very interesting article about Paul, giving much evidence of his
false teachings and possible mental illness (possibly paranoid schizophrenia).
It is too long to post here, but can be read in full here (no i won't give you the link, it's too stupid.)

* personally, I'm not convinced you have to be mentally ill to have visions and similar religious experiences, but I am suspicious of them. *snip* That the Paul's Christ is something quite different from the Jewish sage and wonderworker Jesus seems so obvious to me that I feel foolish pointing it out, yet Christians are so used to confounding the two that I think it needs pointing out. Paul has taken off on his own path, and that path was obviously satisfying to a lot of people, but I don't think it has much to do with Jesus.

* I doubt Paul's honesty, too. He claims to be of the tribe of Benjamin, but it's not clear to me that any definite tribal identity survived among the Jews -- apart from the Levites and the Kohanim (who are just a subset of the Levites) -- as late as the first century. People claim that meticulous genealogies were kept, but were they? I'm not convinced. The genealogies given for Jesus are obviously contrived. Sometimes I wonder whether Paul was even born a Jew at all.

* Paul definately rubs me the wrong way...and seems NOTHING like Y'shua to me.

* Luke was a Gentile doctor whom Paul converted to 'his' form of Christianity! As I say, you should read the article, you might learn something.

Needless to say, most of these erudite Bible scholars are atheists, pagans and whatnot. The more vapid among them I usually choose not to address, but the following post is what got me started on a fair amount of research and is the real subject of interest here today:

"Well, the Book of Acts shows a fair amount of dissension surrounding Paul vis a vis the other Apostles. It was the testimony of James the elder that convicted Paul in Roman court."

My reply:

I'm sorry to say it S___ but I have to strongly disagree.

Before his audience with Nero in Rome, Paul was never formally charged. As a matter of fact Acts makes it clear that the Jews could not even come up with any witnesses OR substantiated charges for either Felix or Festus to act upon, and Agrippa was clearly disgusted by the temple priest's attempted manipulations. Perhaps you are referring to this incident recorded in Acts, which was an internal church council, not involving the Roman judiciary:

Quote:
49 A.D., the Jerusalem Christians, under the leadership of James, the brother of Jesus (not the apostle James), called a council to address the objections of Paul and Barnabas to their position that a person could not be saved who was not circumcised. In essence, upon arriving back to Antioch from what is miscalled Paul's "first missionary journey", Paul and Barnabas heard this heresy and got right in the face of those promoting it.

The miraculous deliverance experienced on this missionary journey (recorded in Acts 13 and 14) could not have gone unnoticed by the massive Christian church in Jerusalem, a church in which "a great company of priests were obedient to the faith" (Acts 6:7), a church in which the sect of the Pharisees had at least some say (Acts 15:5), a church which by 57 A.D. had "many tens of thousands who believed (Acts 21:20- myriades should be translated "tens of thousands" rather than "thousands").

Since Paul had no "authority" from the Jerusalem church, it seems they just had to belittle the work that Jesus Christ was doing through Paul. And so, when Paul and Barnabas got back to Antioch upon completion of the mission they had been called to execute, the message awaiting them was "well Paul, what you did was nice, but none of those people became Christian because none were circumcised."

The Epistle to the Galatians is Paul's answer to the "sentence" of James at the Jerusalem council. Paul's answer is, "they who seemed to be somewhat in conference added nothing to me." (Gal.2:6). But again this was in 49 A.D., eight years before Paul's final trip to Jerusalem and long before he appeared before Nero.

source: Paul's Affivavit to Nero in 62 AD

The source's author postulates, and after study and reflection I may agree with him, that Paul's and Luke's writings' original purpose was not what we think it is.

Quite likely they were part of a compilation of documents presented by Luke in Paul's case before Nero.

As to James: Josephus tells us that that in the interim between Festus' death and the arrival of Albinus to replace him, the high priest had James, the brother of Jesus, thrown off the temple wall and killed. This occurred in 62 A.D. at the very time Paul appeared before Nero, there was no way James could have been in Rome.

humbly submitted for your consideration,

(me)

And here is something to think about:

Quote:
To think that Matthew, Mark, John, Peter, James, and Jude together comprise only 44% of the New Testament, while Paul and Luke occupy 56%, is a fact well worth considering.

Why is this so? After 30 or more years in the ministry, teaching and studying God's Word, and lately being forced to learn some of the rudiments of Law because of an out of control government, the answer becomes crystal clear to me. Paul is the only apostle who appealed to Caesar (Nero) and it appears that the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts were two parts of an affidavit that Luke submitted to the Roman Court in support of Paul. Paul's Epistles would also have been part of the court record and therefore preserved under the authority of the Roman government as Paul originally wrote them. This cannot be said of any of the other writings of the New Testament.

Fascinating! Could it be?? The author also has a theory that Theophilus was actually Nero!

When considering the linguistics of Luke's salutations, it certainly fits like a key in a lock. Theophilus is an esteemed personage of great influence, one who has been taught personally by Paul at great length, and one whom Luke wishes to leave with a written reminder of "what he has been previously taught".

Check out the website. I wish I knew the languages meself, it would make things like this so much more fun.

http://my.en.com/~anders/paul62ad.html

can't help myself, here is another snip from the site:

For reasons I hope to develop in what follows, it is apparent that Nero ruled in favor of Paul, and against the Jerusalem authority. By so doing, he basically ruled that Christianity was separate and distinct from Judaism, which ruling would have cut off massive amounts of money to the Temple treasury.

Prior to 62 A.D., Christians were known as the sect of the Nazarenes, and were either proselytes to the Jews religion, or considered "God fearers". In either event, much of their tithes and offerings would have been sent to Jerusalem from 30 A.D. to 62 A.D. For millions of Christians to learn in 62 A.D. that Paul had been vindicated and Jerusalem indicted, this knowledge would have dramatically stopped the flow of funds into Jerusalem.

Within the next eight years Jerusalem was destroyed and Israel went out of existence. You might say that Jerusalem tried to kill Paul and it was killed instead.

It seems that the authority under which Paul worked, that of Jesus Christ, was, in the end, far superior to the letters of authority Paul had received from the high priest way back in 37 A.D. as city prosecutor. It took only 33 years for Paul's challenge to the secular authority to work its way to a final, and total, resolution. And, it only took 40 years from Jerusalem's daring to crucify Jesus Christ until their Temple was totally destroyed and Israel as a nation was no more.

Deep Christmas is Upon Us, Allelujiah!

For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. - Is 9:6

Luke 2:8 Now there were in the same country shepherds living out in the fields, keeping watch over their flock by night.
9 And behold, an angel of the Lord stood before them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were greatly afraid.
10 Then the angel said to them, “Do not be afraid, for behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy which will be to all people.
11 For there is born to you this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord.
12 And this will be the sign to you: You will find a Babe wrapped in swaddling cloths, lying in a manger.”
13 And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying:
14 “Glory to God in the highest, And on earth peace, goodwill toward men!”

MERRY CHRISTMAS!!

Hey Stud Muffin

oh. my. would somebody tell him the truth, please.

That Horrible Sucking Sound You Hear...

I've just about decided that the quickest way to suck every ounce of inspiration from my brain is to start blogging.

I have nothing to say, absolutely nothing.

Mormon First Aid for Cognitive Dissonance

We were discussing the various fanciful stories in the BoM regarding hundreds of thousands of warriors dying in battle on Hill Cumorah in upstate New York. For which there is no archeological evidence.

Me: The idea that this civilization flourished and was annihilated in upstate NY is ... absurd.

Mormon: I agree.

Me: I'm sorry, but Hill Cumorah presents a huge problem in logic for you then. Here's why.

1. The Book of Mormon states the Hill Cumorah is the place where the plates were placed.
2. The Book of Mormon states the Hill Cumorah is where the battles took place.
3. Respected LDS Church scholars state the Hill Cumorah is in New York, that it is where the plates were placed, and that it is also the place where the battles took place, as confirmed by the Book of Mormon AND the Prophet Joseph Smith.

This is the historical record confirmed by LDS documentation. You admit this idea is absurd, while at the same time testifying that Joseph Smith is a Prophet of God and the Book of Mormon is true.

(I thoughtfully provided many long discourses by Joe and Joseph Fielding Smith and other illustrious revelating leaders to show the truth in these statements). Yikes! Can you say, "cognitive dissonance"? What's a TBM to do?


Here is one response to this dilemma of reason and evidence, to believe what is "absurd" in the words of one Mormon, or believe the BoM and church teachings:

- From the Deseret News, re: GEOGRAPHY PROBLEMS

THE GEOGRAPHY OF the Book of Mormon has intrigued some readers of that volume ever since its publication. But why worry about it?

Efforts to pinpoint certain places from what is written in the book are fruitless because the record does not give evidence of such locations in terms of our modern geography.

Attempts to designate certain areas as the Land Bountiful or the site of Zarahemla or the place where the Nephite city of Jerusalem sank into the sea ‘and waters have I caused to come up in the stead thereof’ can bring no definitive results. So why speculate?

To guess where Zarahemla stood can in no wise add to anyone’s faith. But to raise doubts in people’s minds about the location of the Hill Cumorah, and thus challenge the words of the prophets concerning the place where Moroni buried the records, is most certainly harmful. And who has the right to raise doubts in anyone’s mind?

Our position is to build faith, not to weaken it, and theories concerning the geography of the Book of Mormon can most certainly undermine faith if allowed to run rampant.

Why not leave hidden the things that the Lord has hidden? If He wants the geography of the Book of Mormon revealed, He will do so through His prophet, and not through some writer who wishes to enlighten the world despite his utter lack of inspiration on the point.

SOME AUTHORS have felt ‘called upon’ to inform the world about Book of Mormon geography and have published writings giving their views. These books, however, are strictly private works and represent only their personal speculations. (Deseret News, July 29, 1978, Church News Section, p.16)

The response from my Mormon friend:

Mormon: We've already seen that the BoM does NOT support a New York Cumorah. Joseph may have believed it, at first at least. There is some indication that he later on began to espouse the Central America geography, but he died not long afterwards, and the Saints were once more forced to focus on survival, so that geographical questions reverted back to the previous (most likely incorrect) views. You might have a point if we believed that our leaders or scholars are infallible. We don't though. I don't have to trust Joseph Smith or Oliver Cowdery's views on geography at all.

Well now there's an interesting religion for you. "We believe everything Joseph Smith revealed to us. That is, we believe, until we don't believe it anymore, then we believe something else..."

Global Warming Alarm Company

We were discussing how researchers can be subject to a cascade effect (which is simply an unacceptable bias occuring within the mind of the researcher based on a perceived consensus within his field) that can introduce and amplify error.

and then i read this and suddenly felt a rant coming on...

"To be honest, most of the "experts" that dismiss global warming as a joke aren't very credible."

Now there's a "credible" opinion if i ever heard one. As a matter of fact, this is a classic example of the cascade effect. Credible scientists refusing to jump on the bandwagon quickly enough have not only suffered from the cascade effect, but have been threatened with everything from losing grants to having their credentials revoked. Most of the brave souls left standing in the debate are either retired or independently wealthy. None are listened to however, thanks to the conscientious efforts of the mainstream media to suppress and discredit their research.

"There is some debate as to what will occur with global warming, but that does not mean that it is not real, merely that we do not understand it completely. "

And is there ANY debate as to what will occur when we get down to business and conscientiously recycle our paper and plastic, trade in our SUV's for horses, and cut up our blue jeans for attic insulation? Will that stop global warming and heal Mother Earth, or will we have to take the next giant step and shut down all our cities, power plants, interstate highways and factories to insure the continued safety of the planet? Will it even make a dent? What would it actually take to appease the weening greenbat conscience and allow little children to sleep soundly at night without worrying about how to save the earth, I wonder.

I haven't heard any cogent answers to these burning questions from the peanut gallery, ever. Because the real answer is: Nothing but money. Nothing short of Green (trillions and trillions of $$$) will ever appease the insanity of the Global Warming Alarm Company. mark my words. we have only seen the very tip of the algore iceberg. In the meantime, every pretentious, self-righteous zealot has a reason to congratulate themselves every time they wear hemp or add garbage to the compost pile.

I'm telling you, it's the New Religion. And this set of Pharisees is as hypocritical and self-serving as they come. Ask any politician or scientist to go ahead, dare to disagree with any global warming advocate and see how long it takes to be branded a moron, insane, dangerous, ignorant, etc. or today's equivalent of "crucify him! crucify him!" The "cascade effect" would be the least of their worries.

Quidnunc

Are you a quidnunc? Or is it just a nasty rumor your neighbor is spreading...?

Hostile Environment

Maybe I'm a masochist, but I like to hang out on a very liberal discussion forum which is infested by atheists, muslims, mormons, pagans, wiccans, and for all I know, Algore and Rosie and Michael Moore.

It's a challenge, an opportunity to sharpen my debating skills in a distinctly hostile environment. More importantly my patience is tried by fire and I've had to dump many of my posts from Preview - there have been some nights without a single published comment, even though my fingers were flying and the keyboard was smokin'. *sigh* I've probably deleted more than the 2,000 plus I've posted.

I've forced myself to abandon any hint of anger and edit myself rigorously, cleaving to rational argument and logic, ignoring insults and abuse. "I'm sorry to have to point this out" or "mind you, this is merely an opinion" - are phrases I hate but which have their purpose when communicating in cyberspace.

Oh, how I wish I had kept the posts that were never posted...

The muslims there absolutely hate my guts openly, a sentiment now shared by most of the mormons. Before the forum changed ownership, the moderation was so heavily anti Christian as to be laughable. And now I wish I had kept some of their stupid pm's - the bias was so transparent no one would believe it.

I'll be loading some of the better conversations soon.

Oh, here's a cute PM from a frustrated Mormon poster who, unable to respond rationally to the evidence that Joseph Smith was a fraud and a charlatan, decided to send me a private message rather than getting kicked off the board for repeatedly attacking me publicly:

"Ma'am, since you've joined RF, the only thing you seem to do is tell us how wrong we are. Which is pathetic. Do you really intend on making that your life goal? Telling others how wrong they are? Just as we have 'no proof' for our own beliefs, neither do you. What is this to you? A game?"

(Apppropriately entitled "Sad").

On Joe and Mo

I've been doing some research on Mormons following my 2 years of reflecting on the Ignoble Qu'ran and Mohammed. Has anyone else noticed the somewhat remarkable similarities shared by Joseph Smith & the Book of Mormon / Mohammed and the Koran:

1. visitation by "angels"
2. exaltation of a "prophet"
3. extraction and rewording of biblical texts to make a "new scripture"
4. claims that the new, improved religion is God's response to universal apostasy, and all others are in error.
5. claims that the Bible has been "mistranslated" by Jews and Christians
6. denial of the true (as traditionally understood by most of Christendom) nature of the Biblical Christ.
7. polygamy

The result? a simple obedience and works-based salvation plan emphasizing rules and rituals, overlooking or diminishing the concept of grace. another ritualistic method to keep people in line, obedient, ensuring the progression of authoritarian rule by hierarchy.

and i started thinking, thank God Joseph Smith wasn't another Napoleon... but digging a little deeper revealed some hair-raising little historical factoids:

Joseph Smith printed a sermon by associate Sidney Rigdon in pamphlet form. In this July 4th oration, Rigdon threatened,

"And that mob that comes on us to disturb us; it shall be between us and them a war of extermination, for we will follow them, till the last drop of their blood is spilled, or else they will have to exterminate us: for we will carry the seal of war to their own houses, and their own families, and one party or the other shall be utterly destroyed." wiki, Rigdon's July 4th Sermon



and a sworn affidavit of Thomas B. Marsh from the Church History:

"The Prophet inculcates the notion, and it is believed by every true Mormon, that Smith's prophecies are superior to the laws of the land. I have heard the Prophet say that he would yet tread down his enemies, and walk over their dead bodies; and if he was not let alone, he would be a second Mohammed to this generation, and that he would make it one gore of blood from the Rocky mountains to the Atlantic ocean; that like Mohammed, whose motto in treating for peace was, 'the Alcoran or the Sword.' So should it be eventually with us, 'Joseph Smith or the Sword.' These last statements were made during the last summer. The number of armed men at Adam-ondi-Ahman was between three and four hundred"
(History of the Church 3:167).

Seems Joe and Mohammed were similarly inspired, perhaps by the same source.

My other other blog

Welcome to my Yahoo blog: This is *ta-da* entry number one.

Woo hoo! Look at me, blogging like I know what I'm doing. Okay so here's the plan.
Beware, all ye who enter into this place. There is no sense to be made here. This is MY blog, and as such worthy of being a true reflection of ME. It will be enough of a big deal for me to post something occasionally, to pull from a dozen sources for this and that remembered scrap of something so for now, things posted here will be in no, repeat, no chronological order
.
I have managed to locate a number of discarded/abandoned/neglected web pages and pre-blogs of mine, and it is my fervent hope (translation for those who do not know me: another futile attempt / additional stumbling stone with which I am busily paving my Good Intentions-Paved Road to you know where) to round up this flotsam and jetsam in one place - this one. And deposit it unceremoniously. In no particular order. To be sorted through and organized later.

And we all know what "later" means to a chronic procrastinator. Of course I'll also be throwing in whatever current rants, trivia, forum posts, etc. I feel are worth saving for posterity.
Ha ha. I am tempted to start placing mindbets with myself about when I will actually make another post. A week? 2 years? Will I surprise myself and make a Real Effort to stay up with my blog?

Welcome to my world...

P.S. this is from my dead yahoo blog, may it rest not in peace. Yahoo, I hate your guts forever. You have committed the unpardonable sin of wasting my time and boring me.

P.P.S.  six years after the fact, I decided to edit this welcome post and point out there is a lot, i mean a LOT of deadwood crap floating around on this blog and if you want to get to the gist, meat, and heart of me rather than listing to some endless droning opinionated garbage click on The Junkyard of My Mind.  Until I can get it all organized somehow into something more useful and entertaining I don't really know how else to do it.

I love that you read this, whoever you are.

In the Beginning

...was the Word. This is my umpteenth first entry. When I began in earnest on Yahoo, I was filled with cheerful good intentions, the sun was shining, the birds were singing, and all was well, and all was very well.

Then I tried to do a simple edit - no problem. Then I published my simple edit - big problem. Having garnered the wisdom of these years of typing, writing, editing, programming, I would not fall into the trap of attempting to follow the same simple steps over and over. Why, the very definition of insanity is doing the same thing repeatedly expecting different results, nez pas? And yet, the editor in red letters urged me to madness: Your Post Did Not Publish, Try Again.

Screw yew.

So now I have abandoned the easy to load on my agonizingly slow dialup connection Yahoo blog and taken on the big hairy fraught with loading pitfalls Blogger.

And where are my cheer, my good intentions? Sneering, I see them lying at my feet with all the rest of the flotsam used over the years to pave my road to The Bad Place.

At them, not you, i snarl:

Screw yew. Oh yeah, and welcome to my blog.