by Robert Clark
I just wonder how many Christians actually understand what they read in the bible or know the history behind it and the way it was transformed over the generations?
That also engenders the question of what is secular humanism and why it is superior to fundamental religious doctrine? To that I have profound opinions, as well as factual evidence showing the primary reasons why it is.
Humanism does not concern itself with the fairy tale type mythical hyperbole that is the foundation of all the fundamental religions of this world. All of them rely on stories of antiquity that can never be factually verified. Most, however, can be eliminated on the grounds of logical deduction. Like the story of Muhammad being taken up to heaven on a winged horse and his chest cracked open by God and purified with snow. In fact, a great majority of these stories have been proven to be falsified or altered to the point of irreconciliation, or just so fantastic as to be ridiculous, eliminating them from historical relevance.
A great majority of the Christian bible has, in fact, been plagiarized. A book claiming to be authored by one person when actually authored by a totally different person altogether, at a very different time for a very different audience and for very different reasons.
The bible claims that Mary, the mother of Jesus and the so-called immaculate conception, was accosted by the holy spirit and was then, against her will, impregnated by said spirit, (a scene that sounds totally fictional, not to mention disgusting as all hell), subsequently bearing the Jesus child. Bearing him in Bethlehem in the year Anno Domini.
In history, the exact date of Jesus’ birth is not known but was not on the year 0 Anno Domini. In fact, the closest we can ascertain as to when Jesus might have been born is between 4 B.C.E. and before 7 C.E. His birthday is not the 25th of December. We know that for sure. He had to have been born before King Herod died, in 4 B.C.E. or the story in the Gospel of slaughtering the infants is falsified. Neither of these dates can be reconciled with Anno Domini, even if you mathematically deduce the time accounting for the change from the Gregorian calendar. It just doesn’t work. Therefore, Anno Domini essentially becomes irrelevant.
An old history professor wrote a book pertaining to some documents found by an historical scholar who received permission to scrounge through the Vatican archives. These documents site Mary as being a mistress of King Herod’s son Antipater, King Herod’s first son by Dora, his first wife.
Mary, supposedly the daughter of the Chief High Priest of Herod’s court, was by then pregnant by Antipater. Unfortunately, she was caught up in a whirlwind of intrigue and conspiracy, as well as King Herod having lost his mind. This being the case, Mary was squirreled away from the royal grounds by a court official, a man named Joseph and sheltered in the area of Galilee. Antipater, under suspicion, was later charged with supposedly attempting to murder his father and was executed (according to records he was boiled to death), giving credence to the idea that Jesus was, in fact, a king or the son of a king.
Unfortunately, the word messiah, in the ancient Aramaic of Jesus’ time, had no connection to the meaning it has today. The Messiah, a Jewish or Hebrew term, was chosen or anointed by God to lead Israel, not the connotation of saving the world from sin. That was added by Paul. The Messiah was, at that time, supposed to bring in the Kingdom of God, overthrowing the oppressor (meaning the Roman occupation), and becoming the new David of Israel. That is the extent of his political role in that timeframe.