 |
|
|
|
  About this blog
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.  |
|
|
|
|
| Part of 
It is typical of the atheists on these articles to spew lies about satan and turn their backs on God. The flea and tick shampoo worked but it still itches. Keep casting your stones on the wrong side of the track and d see where you end up.
Amen.
you got it wrong, we turn our back on all figures from the christian mythology.
instead, look to your brothers and sisters of this world. have faith in humanity.
if you try, you will find you don't need god to be a good person.
Your pride clouds your vision and prevents you from seeing and talking to Jesus, who is our Father. The FBI decided not to take the cushion as evidence. Listen to the wisdom of the one and only God.
Amen.
your ego clouds your vision. christianity promotes the idea that the universe was made just for us. sorry, you're not that special.
@bootyfunk
Yelling lies from the tree tops and hoping an atheist’s ear will fall off and hear your lies. I still have the pool cue from the night my daughter was conceived. You atheists shout in the wind only to have leaves fly in your face.
Amen.
so a virgin wants to give advice on relationships? lol.
You must accept that your partner is just a person. fallible, imperfect...
Then you must accept this in yourself.
Then you must spend your marriage remembering this.
4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.
1 Corinthians
Godly marriages are made in heaven!
Marriages are made in heaven, ungodly marriages end in divorce!
Plenty of Christian marriages end in divorce. Plenty of non-religious marriages do not.
christians have a higher divorce rate than atheists.
i'll take an ungodly marriage over a godly one any time.
godly = in a cult
Godly Marriages are made in heaven, ungodly marriages end in divorce!
Living together is friends with "benefits" and marriage is NOT friends with just "benefits" it's a commitment to honor, cherish and LOVE(love as defined in the Bible).
Horse hockey.
you can honor, cherish and love someone without getting married.
Yes, some "so called" Christians are divorced, because of a hardened heart. Read the Bible!
Another one who feels they get to decide who is a true Christian, and who isn't. You people are sad.
dr. seuss books have more knowledge to offer than the bible.
Has this guy ever actually been married? I don't think so. I know Catholic priests are supposed to be celibate, but we know how that goes by the way-side. So I'm not sure if we should be listening to him give advice about something he has no first-hand experience with.
to be watch!
Leading Job site in India
Apply jobs at http://www.sundayjob.com
http://usemesimple.blogspot.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJsD-3jtXz0
I'll tell you what scares the hell out of me; giant Cicadas.
I remember giant grasshoppers from one year when I was at college. They became more and more numerous in the spring and early summer. So many that you could not avoid stepping on them. Then, on some signal, they began eating each other. After only a few days of that they were gone.
One of the earliest memories from my childhood are thousands of giant grasshoppers back in New Mexico. I remember it sounded like rice crispies when you walked, there was no avoiding them.
They sew your lips shut while you sleep. No, I'm just kidding. They are harmless, but they are ugly.
and noisy.
you know what scares me,.. Mormons,.. Mormons with guns.
some people should not be aloud to bare arms and this are the mentally ill and Mormons,... i think I'm being redundant?
I've never actually seen an armed Mormon. The ones that I've seen looked rather meek, I'd say one pocket protector away from being stuffed in someone's gym locker.
no one ever said it was a rational fear, also they want you to think there meek beware the butterfly my friend, beware the butterfly
Well there are problems with Mormonism that's true. Consideration of women is lacking.
The pope only knows theory of marriage. He doesn't know crap about it from real experience.
Lucky him.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_F9nIps46w
ok so you got a new synthesizer for Christmas. you might try playing at the retirement home a few times before trying to go big time. it might give you some new ideas.
Reminds me of the episode of "Friends" when Ross plays "his music" at Central Perk.
this is some bullshit know i have to sign into to A word press acount,.. cnn you a fucked up peace of shit
any ways happy v day
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DuxyXSF4dpA
Cheating and hitting if you do either you do it once. No second chances. There are too many other people out there to waste another second of your life on a cheater.
I've been happily married for over 2 decades and I find the pope's advice spot on.
I have been married 20 years this September. We hit the rocks a couple of years ago and almost did not survive. Forgiveness can be huge. No small thing depending on what has come between you. Sometimes divorce is best.
Agreed. I liked his simple priorities; 1. Permission – I take that to mean discuss ahead of time and get agreement, 2. Thanks – showing appreciation and giving recognition is "money" in the bank, 3. Forgiveness- like you said, our issues are almost never as big as we think they are. This won't work for all pairings for sure, some pairs are just bad fits.
Well said.
AtheistSteve and I have had 4.5 years (5 in June) of some ups and downs but unlike in our younger days, we've learned communications skills. I think we both realize that cooler heads must prevail at times before some issues can be settled. I personally couldn't ask for a better partner in this life, he keeps me grounded.
Truth,
Great to hear that. Best of luck to you both.
Such romantic notions.
Practical advice
1.) Find someone who loves you more than you love them.
2.) Split the bills down the middle
3.) Separate checking accounts
4.) Mind your own business about where they are, what they did and what they want to do or spend money on, you probably don't want to know.
15 years plus.
any one not allowed to get married should not be given marriage advice, just like i should not be giving relationship advice,.. but if you what to know how to use the french tickler,.. pull up a chair.
oh for the love of all that is Holy do not i mean do not,. wait until marriage last thing you want is to hook up with some one your not sexually compatible with. this one time i dated a furry,.. not some one you want to marry,.. another was a sadist,..femdom not yesum. also this one time this girl had like a 5 inch clit,...i should have married her.
Two interesting sides to that coin. On one hand you have people fighting for the right to be married and on the other you have people who (largely for tax reasons) are happy they have the ability to not be married.
we should end the tax or married couples we should end all social engineering tax breaks. its immoral and not what i had in mind for a free nation.
its like sure your free but we would like you to be "this way" and hay if you act like this will give you rewards. i don't know what I'm saying i had a letter of Irish cream and and lost lost of chocolates but yah something like that
No I get you and I am largely against using economic structure as a means of social control. There are always some exceptions.
Frankie, you are not supposed to have ever had s&x, except with your two friends Handulla and Palmella, advice REALLY!!!! Please if the cost of the flowers and candy exceed the price of the locale h00ker and you are on a budget.....
My Valentine's Day advice to Pope-A-Dope is that he releases every bit of information stored in the RCC cult clubhouse about priestly pedophilia and those that continue to coverup crimes against children.
February 14, the day millions of Americans celebrate the stoning, clubbing and beheading of a 3rd century Roman who had the temerity to try to convert Claudius Gothicus to Christianity; with roses, chocolates and greeting cards, all bedecked with red – the ecclesiastical symbol of a martyr's blood.
And it's good for you!!
Ah Valentine. The Patron Saint not only of love, but also epilepsy and the plague.
And if he truly became a cherub in the afterlife, he'd be terrifying!
The cute little winged baby image is nothing like the enormous, fiery, four winged, eyeball covered death machines from the Bible.
The winged and cherubic Eros / Cupid is of course not Valentinus but the son of Aphrodite / Venus.
More myth conflation with paganism. It's almost as bad as Christmas.
I wonder if roses and chocolates also suitable tokens for people who suffer from epilepsy or the plague?
How about a chocolate covered rat?
You don't celebrate christmass or valintine's day because of their history.
So you should be against marriage too.
And families eating an evening meal together.
Who says I don't enjoy Christmas?
Valentine's day is a Hallmark holiday like mother's day and father's day. (I don't celebrate them either.) It creates unnecessary relationship stress. The primary beneficiaries of Valentine's day are stationers, restauranteurs, florists, and chocolatiers.
Demonstrating affection to one's lover is essential to a relationship, but I don't see that it should be mandated by the arbitrary coincidence of the calendar with an obscure Catholic saint who has zero theological relevance and probably doesn't even make the top ten martyr list, though you'd think the stoning, clubbing, beheading trifecta would put him in the running.
actually its a pagan holiday celebrating the vagina now the time for woman around the world to love the vagina
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5uIn74c88w
to be more pierces it it the optimal time for woman to get pregnant.
Francis, nice guy but he suffers from flawed theology and erroneous history making his status as a leader nil.
10,000 young couples from 28 countries attended.
I wonder how many of them use contraceptives?
I wonder how many had had s.ex before marriage?
I wonder if any of them were same s.ex couples?
All the ones who don't want her to get pregnant
9,998
2
*It is coincidence that my estimated number of same sx couples equals the number who abstained until marriage.
"Happy Velentine Day With Red Flowers"
my best friend's mother makes $86 hourly on the internet . She has been without a job for 10 months but last month her pay check was $20416 just working on the internet for a few hours. browse around this website
>>>>>> Sign up here> BAY91.ℭＯℳ
The pope is right on!
Valentine's day is not just about falling in love on Valentine's day, it's about staying in love with the one you professed your love for on Valentine's day.
Great message by Pope Francis in conveying that family and marriage are equally important and component of "love" when it comes to celebrating Valentine's.
John 13:34
New American Standard Bible (NASB)
"34 A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another."
Happy Valentine's Day Everyone.
Jesus did not utter these words. Just more niceties put in his mouth by John. Added details are available.
@ Reality: you put more faith in the Jesus Seminar than the earliest available sources.
Why do you assume Crossan & Funk are more able to determine what is "legitimately" Jesus speaking than those who lived 1800 years closer (even by Crossan & Funk's reckoning! much closer than that if you go with most other scholars) to the events? They are much further separated from the events in question with far fewer resources. It is with good reason that the majority of the AAR regards the Jesus Seminar as an extremist fringe.
ironically, your fanatical support for the Jesus Seminar mirrors the fundamentalists' view of the Bible you so passionately mock. you are a Jesus Seminar fundamentalist.
Farther seperated in years, yes.
Fewer resources, oh hell no.
@ Alias:
1) considering that many scholars believe these accounts were written in the lifetime of the eyewitnesses, could there be a greater resource than hearing *directly* "from the horse's mouth"?
2) purely in terms of extant manuscripts: while we have MANY more biblical manuscripts than almost any other ancient doc.ument, we still only have a handful compared to what was originally there. living in the era when they were written would give access not only to the eyewitnesses themselves, but also to virtually ALL the earliest manuscripts.
in short, much of what biblical scholars argue over now would be moot. it'd be a given because you'd be looking at it. almost all the 'resources' you would point to today that were unavailable then are technologies attempting to get back to / discern what was ALREADY known or done then.
SUM: yes. fewer resources are available now to know what happened then. it's the SOURCE in re-source.
Russ, one of the many ludicrous things about your crackpot religion known as Christianity is that your "god", a purportedly omnipotent creature, somehow can't present that he exists in any clear way in our modern era, and we are somehow supposed to not harbor doubts of his existence regardless. That is absurd and unreasonable to have that expectation, and furthermore, one can go on all day (and beyond) arguing about "evidence" from the ancient past when none of us can go back in time to verify it.
And then there is this whole ridiculous Jesus-sacrifice-salvation nonsense. Seriously, how is it again that your omnipotent being couldn't do his saving bit without the whole silly Jesus hoopla? And how was Jesus' death a "sacrifice", when an omnipotent being could just pop up a replacement son any time with less than a snap of his fingers? Pretty pathetic "god" that you've made for yourself there.
Ask the questions. Break the chains. Join the movement.
Be free of Christianity and other superstitions.
http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/
@ Bob: we've had this conversation ad nauseam.
every time you post the same thing, so i'll simply point you back to our last conversation...
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2014/01/16/supreme-court-skeptical-of-abortion-clinic-buffer-zones/comment-page-3/
Now as previously, Russ, you are unable to provide a valid response, and again now you attempt more dodging. You coward. So, again, the questions:
How is that your "god", a purportedly omnipotent creature, somehow can't demonstrate that he exists in any clear way in our modern era? We are somehow supposed to not harbor doubts of his existence regardless of that. It is absurd and unreasonable for "god" to have that expectation of us
And then there is this whole ridiculous Jesus-sacrifice-salvation nonsense. Seriously, how is it again that your omnipotent being couldn't do his saving bit without the whole silly Jesus hoopla? And how was Jesus' death a "sacrifice", when an omnipotent being could just pop up a replacement son any time with less than a snap of his fingers?
Ask the questions. Break the chains. Join the movement.
Be free of Christianity and other superstitions.
http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/
When does an atheist like Bob grow out of his “the angry atheist phase” or as some atheists call them "superior atheists"? It took me a few years. But I was pretty young.
"Finally, reducing the number of Superior Atheists will be beneficial to the movement as a whole. Our critics enjoy pointing out atheists who act as if they are better than theists. That’s an image we do not want."
"“The fanatical atheists are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. -AE
Break the chains.
http://aafwaterloo.wordpress.com/2011/09/18/your-superiority-complex-annoys-me/
@ Bob: you clearly didn't go to the link.
fine, i'll repost all the germane comments here.
apologies to everyone else for the unduly long thread.
**************
Russ
@ Bob: every time you spout the same set of rhetorical questions. i've answered them repeatedly, but you continue to ask it as if unaware that i've answered it before. even if you disagree with my answers, i'd expect the conversation to actually advance. that's happened with several other atheists on this blog. while i continue to disagree with them, the conversation actually progresses and there is mutual respect. why can't that be the case here?
similarly, you continue to mindlessly post Marshall Brain's link. i've challenged you on this before. i find it highly ironic that you mock Christians as thoughtless while parroting your own prophet.
January 17, 2014 at 5:04 pm |
Cpt. Obvious
Russ, you should have figured it out by now; there's no sense trying to have an intelligent dialogue with any of Marshal Brain's/WWGHA zombie trolls. Now THAT'S religion.
January 17, 2014 at 5:19 pm |
Russ
@ Bob: quite on the contrary, i have answered you directly on several occasions – as well as contesting Marshall Brain's shallow critiques. the dialogue is worthwhile when it's not so repet.itive. if i knew how to search all the old blog pages to find my old responses, I'd just copy & paste to show you.
as a refresher:
1) you begin by assuming God *had* to do it this way – as though there's something above him. that's a self-contradictory view of a Supreme Being.
2) since he didn't *have* to do it this way, the better question is *why* this way? what does it uniquely show? Christians have repeatedly pointed out that only through the cross could God demonstrate two things clearly & simultaneously:
a) we're worse off than we wanted to admit (we deserve that kind of death – that's justice)
b) we're more loved than we ever dared hope (he took what we deserved – that's mercy)
SUM: God upholds BOTH justice & mercy. virtually any other picture requires compromising one or both. considering God defines both, that is incredibly essential for our own understanding of existence, ourselves & (most importantly) Him.
3) it was within the last two weeks that i rather lengthily addressed your "replacement son" issue. i'd point you back to that. the short version: you aren't even addressing anything close to the biblical God's self-articulation. The Trinity does not allow for "replacement sons." Jesus is not a creation; he's the eternal second person of the Trinity (3 persons, 1 God). the sacrifice is qualitatively & categorically bigger than we can fathom because something of infinitely more worth (God's own fellowship within) is being fractured so we can be brought into fellowship with him.
again, as i've often said to you on this, you don't have to agree with Christian doctrine to accurately depict it, and it certainly would make your argument stronger if Christians found your depiction of our faith recognizable.
4) along those same lines, most of Marshall Brain's critiques are founded on exceedingly shallow readings of the Scriptures – if not purposeful misreadings. for example, "it says 'anything i pray in his name' should come true. i prayed for a $1M. i said the magic words. it didn't happen. the Bible is a lie..." etc.
not only does that fail to account for what Jesus said clearly elsewhere (Mt.6 for example), but it also fails to read Jesus' words in light of the whole of his ministry. such a view basically views God as Santa Claus or a magic vending machine – a view which inherently misses *the whole* of the rest of his teaching. this is reading comprehension 101, and Marshall Brain fails it. considering his elsewhere demonstrated intellectual capacities, i cannot merely chalk that up to inability to comprehend. it's purposefully shallow reading – creating a straw man on purpose – but never actually engaging the reality of what Christianity is, claims about existence, God, etc.
it would be laughable if you weren't so adamantly parroting it without realizing how poorly executed his project is. if you really want to criticize Christianity, instead of garnering your critiques from a youtube video someone *without any expertise in the field* has made, read some scholars. there are plenty of agnostic & atheist scholars in the field of biblical studies you could read. now, i certainly disagree with them, but at least we'd be having an intelligent, informed conversation on the matters at hand.
here's an example of actual biblical scholars on opposite ends of the debate...
Bart Ehrman, "Did Jesus Exist?" (a self-proclaimed "agnostic with atheistic tendencies")
Richard Bauckham, "Jesus and the Eyewitnesses" (the opposite end of the spectrum from Ehrman)
January 17, 2014 at 10:15 pm |
"The Superior Atheist believes that its position as an atheist grants it an intellectual superiority above all others. It argues that its position as an atheist allows it access to a truth that more feeble minds have been unable to attain. You may hear it make statements such as, “religion is the sole cause of all wars, 9/11 happened because of religion and no other reason”, or, “the only reason for the existence of faith is a fear of death.” Such statements are, of course, wrong. They are highly simplistic analysis of the complex world in which we live."
One can lack adherence to religion but still subscribe to ideas driven by blind faith. Break the chains. Join the movement.
Be free of superiority complexes and other superst.itions.
http://aafwaterloo.wordpress.com/2011/09/18/your-superiority-complex-annoys-me/
Is Bob a bot? He seems to post the same things over and over in a robotic like manner. Can you program a robot to only express hostility and anger, and nothing else?
Russ, your lengthy spew again does not address my questions directly, despite your usual (and dishonest) claims. So, let's present you with fewer questions this time, to limit your dodging somewhat. Here we go, but this time, try to actually answer directly what you are being asked. No more excuses. Here we go again:
How is that your "god", a purportedly omnipotent creature, somehow can't demonstrate that he exists in any clear way in our modern era? We are somehow supposed to not harbor doubts of his existence regardless of that. It is absurd and unreasonable for "god" to have that expectation of us. For that matter, why can't your pathetic sky fairy even get with the past decade and create his own web presence (no, religious shill sites don't count), or push some tweets out? Even the pope, that creepy hider of criminal priests, could do that much, as can most children.
And then there is this whole ridiculous Jesus-sacrifice-salvation nonsense. Seriously, how is it again that your omnipotent being couldn't do his saving bit without the whole silly Jesus hoopla?
When you finally answer those directly, then we will drag you over to many other questions about your crackpot superstition.
Ask the questions. Break the chains. Join the movement.
Be free of Christianity and other superstitions.
http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/
@ Bob:
1) do you honestly not see the correlation with your prior sets of questions and my answers? on the chance that is actually the case, i'll do a quick pass at your questions... but they are essentially the same ones we've been re-treading.
2) you said: "How is that your "god", a purportedly omnipotent creature, somehow can't demonstrate that he exists in any clear way in our modern era?"
on the contrary, it is my repeated claim that he does demonstrate himself.
a) you exist. you didn't make yourself. even Hawking understands it's a major problem for order to arise from a universe that is supposedly one of disorder by nature. and his book "Grand Design" (an attempt to answer that critique) didn't fare too well among critics – both theist & atheist & everything between.
b) Jesus came in the flesh. God entered time and space. you want 'tweets' & a "web presence". he came in person. at the risk of being cliche: God didn't give an water-tight argument – he gave a water-tight person.
2) you said "We are somehow supposed to not harbor doubts of his existence regardless of that." exactly on the contrary, the entire episode with "doubting Thomas" in Jn.20 ASSUMES we will struggle with doubt.
the "Gospel" literally means "Good News." it doesn't come to you to as an argument to be considered. it comes to you as *news* of what God has done. is resurrection of the dead logical? no, not by any given scientific means. but that's not the question. the question is: is it historically factual? did God enter time and do this? if so, all there is to do is accept the reality. if not, Christians are idiots (1 Cor.15:14-19).
doubts are fine. faith is not the absence of doubt. the strength of faith is not in my devotion to him, but in his devotion to me. in other words, it's the object of faith, not the subject, that gives strength to faith.
a picture: two men are chased by a lion to a cliff's edge. there's a rope bridge, but it's old & threadbare. the first one says "i have 110% faith that bridge will hold!" he climbs out on it, it falls, he dies. the second one sees the lion baring down. he doesn't believe he has a chance. in desperation, he leaps to a small ledge below that he doesn't really think will hold him. he has barely enough 'faith' to jump, but it holds him.
point being: it's not the amount of 'faith' he had, but the object in which he placed his faith that matters.
3) you said: "For that matter, why can't your pathetic sky fairy even get with the past decade and create his own web presence (no, religious shill sites don't count), or push some tweets out?"
i answered that above in 1b, but to press further: why do you expect a God who only acts *on your terms*? doesn't that requirement mean you are dictating reality and parameters to a supposedly "Supreme" being? in such a scenario, isn't that self-defeating (i.e., if such a God existed, it wouldn't be supreme & the point is moot)? your requirements here beg the question because they assume your position is already correct.
4) you said: "Seriously, how is it again that your omnipotent being couldn't do his saving bit without the whole silly Jesus hoopla?" this question i have addressed repeatedly and directly. see my lengthy response from January 17th copied above.
Russ, thanks for your struggles with replying. I appreciate your typing efforts. However, your answers to my questions are simply not valid, and in several cases, contradict themselves. For example, your base claims include that the will and ways of your god cannot be known by us, while at the same time, you claim to know not only the will of that supposed being and its future plans with certainty, but also its prior reasoning and intent. That is self-contradictory, and ridiculous. I remain fully convinced that your entire religious superstition is both ridiculous and entirely man-made, and that the questions still are without valid answers. So the questions again,
How is that your "god", a purportedly omnipotent creature (and a very murderous and vengeful one, according to your Christian owners' manual) , somehow can't demonstrate that he exists in any clear way in our modern era? We are somehow supposed to not harbor doubts of his existence regardless of that. It is absurd and unreasonable for "god" to have that expectation of us. For that matter, why can't your pathetic sky fairy even get with the past decade and create his own web presence (no, religious shill sites don't count), or push some tweets out? Even the pope, that creepy hider of criminal priests, could do that much, as can most children.
And then there is this whole ridiculous Jesus-sacrifice-salvation nonsense. Seriously, how is it again that your omnipotent being couldn't do his saving bit without the whole silly Jesus hoopla? The only honest answer that you can make there is that you don't know, because according to your other statements, you can't know.
It is high time for humanity to put the superstition known as Christianity behind us, into merely a sorry part of our history. That will be a great riddance and step forward.
Ask the questions. Break the chains. Join the movement.
Be free of Christianity and other superstitions.
http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/
The Jesus Seminar is only one of many analyzing the historic authenticity of the NT.
Some added references to review:
1. Historical Jesus Theories, earlychristianwritings.com/theories.htm – the names of many of the contemporary historical Jesus scholars and the ti-tles of their over 100 books on the subject.
2. Early Christian Writings, earlychristianwritings.com/
– a list of early Christian doc-uments to include the year of publication–
30-60 CE Passion Narrative
40-80 Lost Sayings Gospel Q
50-60 1 Thessalonians
50-60 Philippians
50-60 Galatians
50-60 1 Corinthians
50-60 2 Corinthians
50-60 Romans
50-60 Philemon
50-80 Colossians
50-90 Signs Gospel
50-95 Book of Hebrews
50-120 Didache
50-140 Gospel of Thomas
50-140 Oxyrhynchus 1224 Gospel
50-200 Sophia of Jesus Christ
65-80 Gospel of Mark
70-100 Epistle of James
70-120 Egerton Gospel
70-160 Gospel of Peter
70-160 Secret Mark
70-200 Fayyum Fragment
70-200 Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs
73-200 Mara Bar Serapion
80-100 2 Thessalonians
80-100 Ephesians
80-100 Gospel of Matthew
80-110 1 Peter
80-120 Epistle of Barnabas
80-130 Gospel of Luke
80-130 Acts of the Apostles
80-140 1 Clement
80-150 Gospel of the Egyptians
80-150 Gospel of the Hebrews
80-250 Christian Sibyllines
90-95 Apocalypse of John
90-120 Gospel of John
90-120 1 John
90-120 2 John
90-120 3 John
90-120 Epistle of Jude
93 Flavius Josephus
100-150 1 Timothy
100-150 2 Timothy
100-150 T-itus
100-150 Apocalypse of Peter
100-150 Secret Book of James
100-150 Preaching of Peter
100-160 Gospel of the Ebionites
100-160 Gospel of the Nazoreans
100-160 Shepherd of Hermas
100-160 2 Peter
4. Jesus Database, http://www.faithfutures.o-rg/JDB/intro.html –"The JESUS DATABASE is an online a-nnotated inventory of the traditions concerning the life and teachings of Jesus that have survived from the first three centuries of the Common Era. It includes both canonical and extra-canonical materials, and is not limited to the traditions found within the Christian New Testament."
5. Josephus on Jesus mtio.com/articles/bis-sar24.htm
6. The Jesus Seminar, http://en.wikipedia.o-rg/wiki/Jesus_Seminar
7. http://www.biblicalartifacts.com/items/785509/item785509biblicalartifacts.html – books on the health and illness during the time of the NT
8. Economics in First Century Palestine, K.C. Hanson and D. E. Oakman, Palestine in the Time of Jesus, Fortress Press, 1998.
9.The Gn-ostic Jesus
(Part One in a Two-Part Series on A-ncient and Modern G-nosticism)
by Douglas Gro-othuis: http://www.equip.o-rg/articles/g-nosticism-and-the-g-nostic-jesus/
When finished with these, there are 20 more suggested readings.
One result of studying the historic Jesus:
The Apostles' Creed 2014 (updated by yours truly based on the studies of NT historians and theologians of the past 200 years)
Should I believe in a god whose existence cannot be proven
and said god if he/she/it exists resides in an unproven,
human-created, spirit state of bliss called heaven?????
I believe there was a 1st century CE, Jewish, simple,
preacher-man who was conceived by a Jewish carpenter
named Joseph living in Nazareth and born of a young Jewish
girl named Mary. (Some say he was a mamzer.)
Jesus was summarily crucified for being a temple rabble-rouser by
the Roman troops in Jerusalem serving under Pontius Pilate,
He was buried in an unmarked grave and still lies
a-mouldering in the ground somewhere outside of
Jerusalem.
Said Jesus' story was embellished and "mythicized" by
many semi-fiction writers. A bodily resurrection and
ascension stories were promulgated to compete with the
Caesar myths. Said stories were so popular that they
grew into a religion known today as Catholicism/Christianity
and featuring dark-age, daily wine to blood and bread to body rituals
called the eucharistic sacrifice of the non-atoning Jesus.