h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

how exactly do you know that?

of course she was the town prostitute...

...........according to the bible............

........which si the only source we actually have on her........

plus the bible isnt all entirely made up. incidental details like that are likely true

Likely true? Hardly, but that's beside the point. Mary Magdalene as a Wicca priestess is, like all other supposed connections between Wicca and ancient religion, a pleasant fiction for wiccans to indulge in. Unless they actually try to claim it's fact of course, then they are as annoying as christians who don't realise the bible cannot be used as a basis for a moral code without leaving most of it out.

NAITA
rabid atheist
--
2. Chron. 21
19 In the course of time, at the end of the second year, his bowels came out because of the disease, and he died in great pain. His people made no fire in his honor, as they had for his fathers.
20 Jehoram was thirty-two years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem eight years. He passed away, to no one's regret, and was buried in the City of David, but not in the tombs of the kings.

i didnt say that at all, but never mind. no, i know that most of the spiritual content of the bible is untrue, btu if you read between the lines, the old testament is a decent history of the hebrew people, and the gospels describe many things that actually happened during the life of jesus - mundane things, and incidental details are probably true, if not put exhaustive or chronological.

actually.

I didn't actually think you thought the bible was spiritual truth, I don't make judgments like that without more info. I just felt like ranting a little.
I still disagree with you though. The old testament is likely mostly fiction, even the "historical facts". But that's what happens when you write stuff down way after they happened. Which is true for the new testament as well. The gospels were written for a purpose, long after the 'fact', and any detail was likely invented to add realism.
But that's my opinion and as mentioned previously, I'm a rabid atheist. I have no respect for fictional characters (JC) who have such disregard for the livlyhood of respectable pig-farmers.
--
Mark 5
12The demons begged Jesus, "Send us among the pigs; allow us to go into them." 13He gave them permission, and the evil spirits came out and went into the pigs. The herd, about two thousand in number, rushed down the steep bank into the lake and were drowned.

jesus is not a fictional character. just cos your an atheist doesnt mean you have to avoid facts. of COURSE he existed. the debate is as to whether he was actually the son of God or not. but that he existed is unquestionable: people who knew him died professing his existence. and no religion could ahve had such a profound effect on the world and be made up. what did paul set to gain from making jesus up? nothing but brutal death. plus we have independant sources (josephus, philo, pliny) backing up various parts of the gospels and agreeing that jesus *did* exist.

the old testament is not mostly fiction. genesis may be. but exodus isnt. much of it is written mythologically, and is exaggerated, and biasedly recorded. whats the differnece betwee, say 'the red sea' and 'the reed sea' but a typographical error? people didnt sit down and make it all up - its a historical document, which is just full of superstition. ignore characters, but look at it as though it describes the rise of a nation. becuase it does.

Norwegians grow up (well some of us) learning about our kings between 800 and 1200 from the "Saga of the Kings" written by Snorre Sturluson in the early 13th century. The start of that work describes the ancestry of the house of the Ynglings from the gods, warped into a tale of a chieftain from the east, ref. Odin in the Azov mentioned in A767180. Snorre was writing 400 years after the fact, and turning myth into history by replacing heather gods with ancient nobles.

The tales in the old testament were passed down through centuries, and undoubtedly edited for effect along the way. Fitting in myths and tales and moral. Some parts of OT can be _interpreted_ to fit other sources, other parts are clearly contradicted by multiple sources and most parts just wouldn't have been interesting to anyone else.

Yes, Jesus likely existed, but I don't believe he performed any miracles or was the son of god, which leaves little of interest in the new testament.

> and no religion could ahve had such a profound effect on the world
> and be made up
I suppose you mean by 'not made up' that there has to be some historical fact, like a man called Jesus Christ speaking, gaining converts and spawning a religion. I'm tempted though to pretend you meant something else and point out a couple other religions with profound effects that have to be 'made up' for Christianity not to be.

And the unreliability of historical sources don't apply only religious writing. All history writers from the dawn of writing have written what they and their king considered correct rather than what actually happened and in addition mostly wrote long after the fact (There's some on the scene journalism available from ancient times, but even then we get what they perceived, and not necessarily what happened). History is a field of maybees and persumptions, and religious history even more so.

Well, it would also be certainley hard for her to be a Wiccan priestess, seing is Wicca (as the entry so gladly refrains from mentioning), while having roots in ancient theologies, dates itself to 1954 :}

Isaac.

i agree its unreliable. but true, if you discount miracles.

You're entitled to your beliefs of course, my point is just that it hasn't been proven to be true, even without the miracles. And what do you mean by 'unreliable but true' anyway?
Oooh, must find another bible quote to put in here...
---
Ephe. 5
22Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.
6
5Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. 6Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but like slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. 7Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not men, 8because you know that the Lord will reward everyone for whatever good he does, whether he is slave or free.

nothing can be proven to be true. thus you are a figment of my diseased imagination. thus i am right cos you dont exist.

Hey, I'm offended! I'm certain I could be a figment without your imagination being diseased.
--
Matt 5
31"It has been said, 'Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.' 32But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery.

nothings rpoved. but there is certainly a kernel fo truth in the old testament

Just for fun I'm gonna quote this anecdote D is an unbeliever and C proclaims the Bible is a true account of the history of the jews. Not it actually relates to this 'debate'.
--
D: Was there a road named Route 66?
C: Yes.
D: Was there an event called the "Great Depression"?
C: Yes.
D: You agree that during this time there was also an event called the "Dust Bowl"?
C: Of course.
D: Do you agree that it is an historical fact that during this time thousands of poor farmers from Oklahoma and Arkansas headed west to California, the so-called "Okies" and "Arkies"?
C: Sure.
D: Then, using your logic, have I just proved that "The Grapes of Wrath" is not a fictional novel with an historical setting, but an historical, documentary, account of the travels of the Joad family during the aforementioned events?
C: Well, ye....no.........uh........um.......
---
2 SAM 20:9-10
Joab said to Amasa, "How are you, my brother?" Then Joab took Amasa by the beard with his right hand to kiss him. Amasa was not on his guard against the dagger in Joab's hand, and Joab plunged it into his belly, and his intestines spilled out on the ground. Without being stabbed again, Amasa died.

yes. thats EXACTLY it. thats entirely my point. thanks. i couldt have put it better myself. the grand events that affected the nation happened and are documented. the characters in the stoires are largely fictional.

I'm amazed, we're actually almost agreed. Now all we have to do is hammer out which events can be considered 'grand'.

they werent grand at all. the hapiru, as the spciety was originally called, were compleltely irrelevant on a global scale and were nearly wiped out many times.

sadly, im off to uni tomorrow, to study this kind of stuff actually...in a few weeks ill be back with some more ammo

Bah, unfair. How's a comp sci guy going to be able to compete with that!
And what kind of half-*rs*d uni is this where you can't access h2g2? I spent most of my time at uni fooling around on the internet, and so should you.
Anyways, my dictionary informs me that the hapiru-hebrew link is only one of several hypotheses on what hapiru meant back then. (Back then being 5000 years ago.) I just love dictionaries.

*sigh*

whatever you say, guys. to be quite honest, i'm rather tired of fighting over this entry. it doesn't get anyone anywhere, and it only serves to get me all riled up.

thanks for your input.