Ah, Religion - My Short Story

[lukep]

I have mixed opinions on the subject of Christianity. (Jesus fucking rocks IMO) Way too complicated to go into here, though.

I find your lack of lack of faith disturbing...

Seriously, I've read some pretty smart things from you in the past and I think it would be really interesting to hear how you could post something as smart as the specific bible refutations above, yet believe that "Jesus fucking rocks."

Or do you believe he was just a mortal carpenter/philosopher that had no affiliation to the great fairy in the sky?

Either way, If you don't believe in the words of the New Testament bible(s), how much could you possibly know about JC? Just a few secular-sounding footnotes in other historical accounts?

 

[JoseArmando]

There's an inherent problem with trying to explain to christians why their whole system is flawed.

That problem is the fact that strong enough beliefs are immune to counter examples. So basically it's impossible to reason with them.

 

[writtenstyle]

There's an inherent problem with trying to explain to christians why their whole system is flawed.

That problem is the fact that strong enough beliefs are immune to counter examples. So basically it's impossible to reason with them.

Same with evolutionists, athiests and agnostics. Oh wait...

 

[SUP3RNOVA]

Same with evolutionists, athiests and agnostics. Oh wait...

Why have you neglected the posts describing all the inconsistencies and fallacies in the Bible?

That game show video is a bit crude, but they point out a lot of contradictions that you can look up for yourself.

If God wanted to put his religion into one book, you would think he'd monitor the guys writing it a bit more...

 

[writtenstyle]

Why have you neglected the posts describing all the inconsistencies and fallacies in the Bible?

In your last response you asked me to use anything BUT the bible. That takes me out of the equation. Asking me to prove Christianity without the bible is like me asking you to prove science without using science.

You will never get a satisfactory answer to your questions if you want Christians to not use the bible to answer questions about the bible or Christianity.

Nothin else I can do for you after that statement.

 

[ChrisS]

I find your lack of lack of faith disturbing...

Seriously, I've read some pretty smart things from you in the past and I think it would be really interesting to hear how you could post something as smart as the specific bible refutations above, yet believe that "Jesus fucking rocks."

Or do you believe he was just a mortal carpenter/philosopher that had no affiliation to the great fairy in the sky?

Either way, If you don't believe in the words of the New Testament bible(s), how much could you possibly know about JC? Just a few secular-sounding footnotes in other historical accounts?

Let's just say that I agree with his basic philosophy (Presented in the NT). As a historic example of someone to emulate, he's one of the best.

 

[PixabitInc]

SUP3RNOVA..

Spend some time reading the articles here. It's pretty interesting, they make solid points and there is evidence to back it up ( you can cite specific passages in the bible).

Arguments Against Christianity

New Testament Contradictions
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/paul_carlson/nt_contradictions.html


also check out these articles:
Best Arguments For and Against Christianity and Theism



Some Arguments Against Christianity:
Jesus' endorsement of the murderous immorality of Yahweh in the Torah;
Jesus' doctrine of "eternal punishment" in the "eternal fire" of Hell;
Jesus' failure to claim actual divinity;
Jesus' failed prophecy of his imminent return;
Jesus' failure to competently reveal his doctrines (concerning e.g. salvation, hell, divorce, circumcision, and diet) in his own written account or that of an eyewitness;
Jesus' failure to perform miracles the accounts of which cannot be so easily explained as faith-healing, misinterpretation, exaggeration, and embellishment;
Jesus' failure to attract significant notice (much less endorsement) in the only detailed contemporaneous history of first-century Palestine;
Jesus' failure to recruit
anyone from his family,
any acquaintance from before his baptism,
a majority of Palestinian Jews, and even
some of those who heard his words and witnessed his alleged miracles.

 

[SUP3RNOVA]

In your last response you asked me to use anything BUT the bible. That takes me out of the equation. Asking me to prove Christianity without the bible is like me asking you to prove science without using science.

You will never get a satisfactory answer to your questions if you want Christians to not use the bible to answer questions about the bible or Christianity.

Nothin else I can do for you after that statement.

You don't have to reference the Bible to acknowledge or dispute the inconsistencies in it. Are you aware of all the contradictions in the Bible or do you only allow your mind to take in what fits with your belief? This seems to be the biggest problem in arguing with the everyday religious person...you bring up contradictions and all you get back is something about how God is all powerful and he had a reason for everything he did.

 

[mgtarheels]

:love-smiley-086:

 

[writtenstyle]

Ok. Give me a contradiction. I'm at ihop so I don't want to go back and find your previous statements

 

[PixabitInc]

Here is a good one:


B. THE ANGEL'S MESSAGE

In Matthew, the angel appears to Joseph in a dream and tells him that Mary's child will save his people from their sins. In Luke, the angel tells Mary that her son will be great, he will be called the Son of the Most High and will rule on David's throne forever. A short time later Mary tells Elizabeth that all generations will consider her (Mary) blessed because of the child that will be born to her.

If this were true, Mary and Joseph should have had the highest regard for their son. Instead, we read in Mark 3:20-21 that Jesus' family tried to take custody of him because they thought he had lost his mind. And later, in Mark 6:4-6 Jesus complained that he received no honor among his own relatives and his own household.



--- Makes absolutely no sense?

 

[Jokerr]

Same with evolutionists, athiests and agnostics. Oh wait...

It's not the same at all. Since the premise is "strong enough beliefs" you can't argue that it's the same with atheists, since our lack of beliefs aren't beliefs.

Once again, lack of belief != belief.

 

[lukep]

Let's just say that I agree with his basic philosophy (Presented in the NT). As a historic example of someone to emulate, he's one of the best.

That's cool, I guess. Usually he is quoted (by humans) as having lived a life of great example for us all.

I've seen a lot of evidence that he existed, too; the most compelling by far Jim Cameron's Lost tomb of Jesus. Did you see that yet?

However this stuff about Horus (and others before) being Jesus first makes a lot of sense too. How are we to believe anything at all about JC is true if we discard the literal word of the New Testament? -It's not like any of his apostles even met him...

I think it's most likely that sometime around 300 AD when the NT was being pieced together the evil bastards that did so had heard mixed stories about Jesus, perhaps some true, but others from Horus and so on and put them all together as one super-human sounding sonofagod.

If you were to agree, does it make it any harder for you to follow someone who could only be 5% of what you heard about him?

 

[turbolapp]

The Bible reeks of PEOPLE. I laugh at the sheeple who believe in the absolute infallibility of it. "Every chapter and verse was divinely inspired". You gotta be fucking kidding me.

I see you have decided it would be a lonely eternity without me on your pious cloud and have decided to join me in the sulfuric pits of hell.

Welcome. Why don't you have a seat over there.

 

[writtenstyle]

Here is a good one:


B. THE ANGEL'S MESSAGE

In Matthew, the angel appears to Joseph in a dream and tells him that Mary's child will save his people from their sins. In Luke, the angel tells Mary that her son will be great, he will be called the Son of the Most High and will rule on David's throne forever. A short time later Mary tells Elizabeth that all generations will consider her (Mary) blessed because of the child that will be born to her.

If this were true, Mary and Joseph should have had the highest regard for their son. Instead, we read in Mark 3:20-21 that Jesus' family tried to take custody of him because they thought he had lost his mind. And later, in Mark 6:4-6 Jesus complained that he received no honor among his own relatives and his own household.

--- Makes absolutely no sense?

Cool question. I hadnt heard there was a problem with that story and the following scriptures.

Mark 3:20 is talking about Jesus' friends. All those people named in the preceeding verses are his disiples and aquantences (sp). This is NOT his immediate family thinking he has "lost his mind", or more literally, "took his ministry to far, as in Zeal"

How can I conclude that these were his friends and not his immediate family? Well, 10 verses later in Mark 3:31, the bible refers to Jesus' brothers and mother. In being consistant, the same language would have been in both verses. But it wasnt, so we know that these are two groups of people his friends in vs 21, and his family in vs 31.

As for Mark 6:4-6, Jesus faced disbelief all through his life, which is what led to him getting axed. But, that is no differenet from other characters in the bible. For instance, David loved the Lord with all his heart, wrote a lot of the OT, yet he was an adulturer and murderer, while praising the lord. That is also a form of disbelief in God.

I dont see this as a contradiction, as much as a wtf people. Jesus was on Earth and you didnt believe him? Idiots... That kind of thing.

Thanks to the person for the meme's for making this page load slow as crap on my phone.

 

[Fatbat]

Why did ancient humans get to see proof for hundreds and hundreds of years? But when we can actually record things and are smart enough to at least slightly understand science/physics...religion is gone only to return "like a thief in the night".

Ergot. Mold the grows on rye is basically LSD and people back then were stone cold trippin' and seeing shit and they wrote about it. End of story.

 

[mgtarheels]

It's not the same at all. Since the premise is "strong enough beliefs" you can't argue that it's the same with atheists, since our lack of beliefs aren't beliefs.

Once again, lack of belief != belief.

Atheists have a belief in the disbelief of a supreme being(s).

 

[writtenstyle]

It's not the same at all. Since the premise is "strong enough beliefs" you can't argue that it's the same with atheists, since our lack of beliefs aren't beliefs.

Once again, lack of belief != belief.

Athiests have very strong beliefs and they are always trying to convince Christians of them. Your belief is in your disbelief, otherwise you wouldnt defend it.

 

[lukep]

Atheists have a belief in the disbelief of a supreme being(s).

BWAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA!

"A belief in the Disbelief!" -Now I've heard it all!

I can't speak for all atheists, but I personally have never had to believe that I don't believe in the easter bunny...

Although I'd be inclined to believe in the disbelief of believing in god among atheists if the need to disbelieve in something unbelievable presents itself.

Are you trollin'?

 

[lukep]

Athiests have very strong beliefs and they are always trying to convince Christians of them. Your belief is in your disbelief, otherwise you wouldnt defend it.

Get that off a fortune cookie?

1. Atheists don't go around trying to convert Christians. -At least I've never heard of a case... We pretty much just like to keep to ourselves because we know how hard it is to do so, and would find it more fun to eat shards of glass than talk about the inner workings of the bible.

Christians on the the other hand make it their BUSINESS (very literally) to go out and convert anyone else to Christianity. Many wars have started over exactly that, and things like that plus the Inquisition have left christians with absolutely NO PLACE WHATSOEVER to accuse anyone else with "always trying to convince" others of their beliefs. Pot Kettle Black.


2. Yes, we like anyone else have come to believe some things, like things that are supported with facts and lots of evidence. But our basis for doing so is based upon reason, and we damn well make it a point not to "believe" things that aren't well proven.

We even use the word differently than you do. It quite literally has a different meaning to us; The religious seem to lazily apply the word belief to mean something that you have been convinced of (internally) on any level.

Meanwhile an Atheist will try to avoid using the word at all times unless cornered, because it assumes a much larger burden of evidence to us... We'd be embarrassed to say "I believe all sheep are white" and then find out later that black or even off-white sheep exist. -That would lessen our feeling of self worth or integrity.

And don't even get me started on faith... That is something just about impossible to prove exists among us at all.