Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!umcp-cs!mangoe
From: mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: The Revelation to Mike Huybensz
Message-ID: <4881@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 13-Apr-85 23:15:49 EST
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.4881
Posted: Sat Apr 13 23:15:49 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 18-Apr-85 02:12:50 EST
References: <281@cvl.UUCP> <465@cybvax0.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: U of Maryland, Computer Science Dept., College Park, MD
Lines: 62

In article <465@cybvax0.UUCP> mrh@cybvax0.UUCP (Mike Huybensz) writes:

>The disciples were probably fully aware of JC's fraudulence.  They worked
>together as a religious cabal, with JC as leader and the apostles as
>shills.  In the prophet biz, you have to talk up your main man.

>Well of course.  If they said gawd ruled in some material way we
>could see, their audiences would have laughed and said "No, the Romans do."
>This is an example of the god of the cracks school of religion.
>God's not nearly as busy as he used to be now that we have materialistic
>explanations for winds and planetary movements and such.

Obviously Mike has some source of historical information we are not party to.
I mean, it's just like you read in the _Inquirer_ (NOT Skeptical, the other
one).  "Jesus: the true story!"  "Brain-washed by an Apostle!"  "The Gospels
were Written By Francis Bacon!"  :-)  At this late date in history, such
things represent pure speculation, all the more so considering Mike is
second-guessing text written 18 centuries ago, presumably from earlier
versions.

It also very interesting that he claims to know why God seems to have chosen
to do many fewer miracles these days.  Is Satan writing exposes on the
Godhead?  ("Menage-a-trois on the White Throne!"  THe mind boggles at the
possibilities! :-))

>Consider the parable of the bind men and the elephant.  You say the
>elephant is like a wall because you examine 2000 years of interpretation
>by believers who didn't question their assumptions.  I've felt the wall,
>and may not know its wrinkles as well as you do, but I have also felt the
>snake-like trunk of interpretation without supernatural assumptions.

Seems to me like you have felt the snake-like trunk of naturalistic
assumptions.

>2000 years of constant reinterpretation testify to the vagueness of the
>Gospels.  Some interpretations may view them as ambiguous, with geniuses
>for authors, but like criticisms of art, the results are subjective and
>vary with the phases of the moon.  That's why there is so little
>agreement among the thousands of Christian sects about specific meanings
>of passages of the bible.

The evidence supports the hypothesis that various sects exist due to a)
differences of opinion on subjects that scripture is silent on, and b)
suppression of this or that teaching that someone doesn't like.  Sure, the
NT is not totally unambiguous, but my God! the thing isn't an operator's
manual for christianity.

>My quote above is how the biblical parable of JC and Satan can be used
>as a simple conspiracy theory explanation for (McCarthy-like) silencing
>of skeptics.

Since it has never been so used in the history of christianity, this
argument is without merit as it stands.

>Isn't that funny.  Fraudulent psychics and their ilk follow this same
>practice today.  All of a sudden their "powers" won't work in front of
>professional magicians and other skeptics.

Perhaps Mike should read _Pilgrim's Regress_, paying particular attention to
the passage on copies (in Zeitgeistheim).

Charley Wingate   umcp-cs!mangoe