What do you object to about Christianity?

[khon]

I recall writing a paper on Christianity and slavery in college. But that was about 30 yr ago and I don't recall the details except that Christians were an important element of the abolitionist movement.

To understand slavery in biblical times, you have to understand Jesus' mission. He didn't come to free men from physical bondage, but from spiritual bondage.

All you have to do is pick up your bible and read Exodus 21, then you'll know what I'm talking about.

Obviously I'm not saying that current day christians favor slavery, but the bible certainly does, which tends to invalidate other arguments starting with "the bible says ...."

 

[FalseChristian]

The bible is true. Many of the prophecies in the bible have already taken place and there are more to come such as the fall of Babylon the Great (the worldwide empire of false religion) and the destruction of those who do not live by Jehovah's high standards.

 

[Ns1]

The bible is true. Many of the prophecies in the bible have already taken place and there are more to come such as the fall of Babylon the Great (the worldwide empire of false religion) and the destruction of those who do not live by Jehovah's high standards.

lol

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

All you have to do is pick up your bible and read Exodus 21, then you'll know what I'm talking about.

Obviously I'm not saying that current day christians favor slavery, but the bible certainly does, which tends to invalidate other arguments starting with "the bible says ...."

Racial slavery is never condoned in the bible, and as I pointed out, many of the grat abolitionists were Christians.

In the OT people would sell themselves into the possession of another individual so that they could have security in regular meals, shelter, and safety from enemies. God gave Israel rules in dealing with these “slaves” in Exodus 21:2-11, 20-21, 26.

It's not the type of slavery you ordinarily think about.

 

[HumblePie]

It's seems like you've hit the mother lode of conspiracy theories. The historicity of Jesus is accepted by virtually all reputable mainstream scholars.

No it is not. Not at all.

Motherload of conspiracy theories? Puhlease.

Yet you claim to be a scientist and can not follow the simple scientific method. Historians also have a method for verifying the past,

1) Physical empirical evidence
2) Multiple cross-referenced first hand accounts
3) Even more cross-references second hand accounts as long as there are at least 1 first hand account.


Without that, there is no historical proof. That's it. The historical figure of Jesus does not meet one single criteria. Not one. Hence, he is not a historical figure. The problem is that soo many people want to believe he was real and coerced others into believing he was real, you get crappy biblical scholars telling the world he was.

Until someone finds something that fits in the criteria above then he's not real.

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

No it is not. Not at all.

Motherload of conspiracy theories? Puhlease.

Yet you claim to be a scientist and can not follow the simple scientific method. Historians also have a method for verifying the past,

1) Physical empirical evidence
2) Multiple cross-referenced first hand accounts
3) Even more cross-references second hand accounts as long as there are at least 1 first hand account.


Without that, there is no historical proof. That's it. The historical figure of Jesus does not meet one single criteria. Not one. Hence, he is not a historical figure. The problem is that soo many people want to believe he was real and coerced others into believing he was real, you get crappy biblical scholars telling the world he was.

Until someone finds something that fits in the criteria above then he's not real.

"I have often been asked why more academics do not take the time to respond to the Jesus Myth theory. After looking into this question, I discovered that most historians and New Testament scholars relevant to the topic have concluded that Jesus Mythers are beyond reason and therefore decide that they have better things to do with their time. Here are some examples."

http://www.bede.org.uk/price1.htm

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

If the goal of people in Christian ministry is "fleecing the flock" they are doing quite a poor job of it considering their low salaries.

I didn't say that everyone was. Most of them aren't very smart. I was particularly talking about Strobel.

I'll take it from your decision not to address this...

You're welcome to preset a case on this forum, if you think you have a compelling one. I've read Strobel and was left wanting. If you don't have anything better than his compendium of errors in fact and reasoning, however, don't waste my time.

...that you do not have a compelling case to present.

 

[HumblePie]

"I have often been asked why more academics do not take the time to respond to the Jesus Myth theory. After looking into this question, I discovered that most historians and New Testament scholars relevant to the topic have concluded that Jesus Mythers are beyond reason and therefore decide that they have better things to do with their time. Here are some examples."

http://www.bede.org.uk/price1.htm

LOL. did you not read my wiki links? There is a very simple test for historic authentication. The historical figure of Jesus fails that test. It is all very simple. Until actual evidence comes forth to change that verdict it doesn't matter what you or those fundie websites you keep listing say. It is as simple as black and white. The evidence is either there or it isn't. As of right now there is no empirical evidence. So there is no historical figure.

That is not to say that one day someone may find actual, authenticated, empirical evidence that proves he was a living breathing man that may have some claim to the story of the Yeshua of Nazerath. Until that day comes he has not been proven to exist.

Even after he is proven, the rest of the story of his life needs to be authenticated and I doubt that will ever been done. Why? The amount of accounts from 4th hand and beyond to be written so many times makes it a damn near impossible task.

You can list all the Christian references that you want, but this is one argument you are going to lose.

But if it makes you feel any better, believing in Christ is the same as believing in God. You have no proof of either, just faith that they are. If that works for you, so be it. I'm not a cold hearted bastard trying to dissuade you from your belief system. You are the one that put out this thread and I made a point that the biggest reason is that Yeshua the Historical figure can not be scientifically proven. End of point.

 

[Ns1]

That is not to say that one day someone may find actual, authenticated, empirical evidence that proves he was a living breathing man that may have some claim to the story of the Yeshua of Nazerath. Until that day comes he has not been proven to exist.

Dude, even then, how the fuck do you prove jesus ressurected himself?

"sup ya'll, i'm hungry and back from the dead. where's my big piece of chicken?"

 

[Soundmanred]

I don't understand this it at all. Can you explain it to me?

You should have started your thread with this, I'm sure you could get us to agree with you then.

 

[NinjaTech]

The bible is a historical account of Jesus which lists many eye-witness and secondary accounts of his existence. The bible is also composed of many different books with many different authors who all collaborate the existence of Jesus. There also ancient tablets and manuscripts such as the Dead Sea Scrolls that all collaborate the existence of Jesus.

Ironically, most religions of the world accept the existence of Jesus as a key historical figure. However, a lot of religions do not believe that he was the son of God.

~NT

 

[destrekor]

Dude, even then, how the fuck do you prove jesus ressurected himself?

"sup ya'll, i'm hungry and back from the dead. where's my big piece of chicken?"

"Dude, y'all hear about Jesus?"
"Yeah, Joseph, that sucks. Why'd the Romans have to do that, anyway?"

"Man, they're pricks."
"We agree, Mary."

"Hey, what say we make a grand ol' story about how he'll save us all in the afterlife?"
"Oh, we could each right our own set of chapters!"
"We'll call it the Testament of Jesus"
"Dude, in my book - he's totally gonna be the Son of God. And, ahaha, there's only one God."
"Ah, I'm going to run with that idea too! Nice!"

100 years later:
"Hey guys, we can't compile these books your grandparents wrote, not all of them. Mary has a book, and some of her tales don't sync-up with the rest."
"Eh, just burn that one then. What was it exactly?"
"She basically says she slept around - looks like she was proud of it!"

 

[mk]

The bible is a historical account of Jesus which lists many eye-witness and secondary accounts of his existence. The bible is also composed of many different books with many different authors who all collaborate the existence of Jesus. There also ancient tablets and manuscripts such as the Dead Sea Scrolls that all collaborate the existence of Jesus.

Ironically, most religions of the world accept the existence of Jesus as a key historical figure. However, a lot of religions do not believe that he was the son of God.

~NT

LOL. :awe:

 

[Mike Gayner]

The bible is a historical account of Jesus which lists many eye-witness and secondary accounts of his existence. The bible is also composed of many different books with many different authors who all collaborate the existence of Jesus. There also ancient tablets and manuscripts such as the Dead Sea Scrolls that all collaborate the existence of Jesus.

Ironically, most religions of the world accept the existence of Jesus as a key historical figure. However, a lot of religions do not believe that he was the son of God.

~NT

LOL you Christians make me laugh. Describing the bible as a historical account? More liek hysterical account :awe::awe::awe:

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

Dude, even then, how the fuck do you prove jesus ressurected himself?

"sup ya'll, i'm hungry and back from the dead. where's my big piece of chicken?"

Over 500 people saw Jesus' resurrected body at the same time!

The New Testament accounts of the resurrection were being circulated within the lifetimes of men and women alive at the time of the resurrection. Those people could certainly have confirmed or denied the accuracy of such accounts.

 

[HumblePie]

Over 500 people saw Jesus' resurrected body at the same time!

The New Testament accounts of the resurrection were being circulated within the lifetimes of men and women alive at the time of the resurrection. Those people could certainly have confirmed or denied the accuracy of such accounts.

LOL no. Even according the the "bible" the stone was just removed 3 days later when people came to check and the body was never found. Everyone just assumed he had arisen and moved it himself. I always read that story and thought logically, "why didn't the people just assume someone had come to rob from a tomb and snatched the body away instead?"

Again, unless you have some signed accounts from 500 witnesses, or a group affidavit of some sort, it didn't happen.

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

I always read that story and thought logically, "why didn't the people just assume someone had come to rob from a tomb and snatched the body away instead?"

After the body was placed in a solid rock tomb, an extremely large stone was rolled against the entrance of the tomb. Large stones weighing approximately two tons were normally rolled (by means of levers) against a tomb entrance.
A Roman guard of strictly disciplined fighting men was stationed to guard the tomb. This guard affixed on the tomb the Roman seal, which was meant to "prevent any attempt at vandalizing the sepulcher. Anyone trying to move the stone from the tomb's entrance would have broken the seal and thus incurred the wrath of Roman law.

Those who observed the stone after the resurrection describe its position as having been rolled up a slope away not just from the entrance of the tomb, but from the entire massive sepulcher. It was in such a position that it looked as if it had been picked up and carried away. If the disciples had wanted to come in, tiptoe around the sleeping guards, and then roll the stone over and steal Jesus' body, how could they have done that without the guards' awareness?

 

[HumblePie]

After the body was placed in a solid rock tomb, an extremely large stone was rolled against the entrance of the tomb. Large stones weighing approximately two tons were normally rolled (by means of levers) against a tomb entrance.
A Roman guard of strictly disciplined fighting men was stationed to guard the tomb. This guard affixed on the tomb the Roman seal, which was meant to "prevent any attempt at vandalizing the sepulcher. Anyone trying to move the stone from the tomb's entrance would have broken the seal and thus incurred the wrath of Roman law.

Those who observed the stone after the resurrection describe its position as having been rolled up a slope away not just from the entrance of the tomb, but from the entire massive sepulcher. It was in such a position that it looked as if it had been picked up and carried away. If the disciples had wanted to come in, tiptoe around the sleeping guards, and then roll the stone over and steal Jesus' body, how could they have done that without the guards' awareness?

HAHA, there was no measured weight of the stone. And from what I read it was just a large stone was placed there by several large roman soldiers. It also depends upon which version of the bible you read on that story because later and more "modern" versions have added all sorts of details to that story that were not originally there.

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

HAHA, there was no measured weight of the stone. And from what I read it was just a large stone was placed there by several large roman soldiers. It also depends upon which version of the bible you read on that story because later and more "modern" versions have added all sorts of details to that story that were not originally there.

[FONT=TimesNewRoman,Bold]Features of the Stone Covering Jesus’ Tomb[/FONT]​

[FONT=TimesNewRoman,BoldItalic]The text clearly indicates that the stone was of great size![/FONT]
[FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]and he rolled a large stone against the entrance of the tomb and went[/FONT]
[FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]away. (Matthew 27:60) [/FONT]
[FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]And looking up, they *saw that the stone had been rolled away, although it was extremely large. (Mark 16:4)[/FONT]​

[FONT=TimesNewRoman,BoldItalic]The text indicates that the women coming to the tomb knew they could not move it by themselves, though there were three of them.[/FONT]
[FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]And they were saying to one another, “Who will roll away the stone[/FONT]​

[FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]for us from the entrance of the tomb?” (Mark 16:3)[/FONT]

[FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic][FONT=TimesNewRoman,BoldItalic]Engineers used the data from the Biblical record and geologic[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic][FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]information about the rock in Palestine to calculate an approximate weightfor the tomb stone of Joseph’s tomb.[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]These engineers have calculated the weight of a stone of the size[/FONT]
[FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]comparable to the Biblical and archeological descriptions. They[/FONT]
[FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]calculated that this stone would have weight between 1 and a half; and 2 tons![/FONT]
[FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]Obviously a stone of this size would have required many strong men to [/FONT][FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]move it from its place.[/FONT][FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]​

[/FONT]

 

[JackBurton]

Over 500 people saw Jesus' resurrected body at the same time!

The New Testament accounts of the resurrection were being circulated within the lifetimes of men and women alive at the time of the resurrection. Those people could certainly have confirmed or denied the accuracy of such accounts.

Ok, you obviously have not read the Bible and you obviously are going by what someone else claimed. Where in the Bible did it say there were 500 eye witness accounts? Secondly, the people he "appeared to" didn't even recognize him. Two people walking down a path claimed they saw Jesus but said it didn't look like him. ??? Jesus also appeared to Mary Magdalene and she didn't even recognize him. She thought he was a gardener. Yes, Mary Magdalene the lady that knew Jesus very well didn't even recognize him. Wow, great eye witness accounts. And those accounts are in the Bible which should confirm this story.

Now outside the Bible, not one eye witness account. Weird.

 

[JackBurton]

LOL no. Even according the the "bible" the stone was just removed 3 days later when people came to check and the body was never found. Everyone just assumed he had arisen and moved it himself. I always read that story and thought logically, "why didn't the people just assume someone had come to rob from a tomb and snatched the body away instead?"

Again, unless you have some signed accounts from 500 witnesses, or a group affidavit of some sort, it didn't happen.

He is parroting this information from a guy that is going around saying this. I know, I've actually heard the originator of this myth. And yes, he is a moron with absolutely ZERO evidence to back up his claims, yet people just take it at face value and then go on repeating it.

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

Ok, you obviously have not read the Bible and you obviously are going by what someone else claimed. Where in the Bible did it say there were 500 eye witness accounts? Secondly, the people he "appeared to" didn't even recognize him. Two people walking down a path claimed they saw Jesus but said it didn't look like him. ??? Jesus also appeared to Mary Magdalene and she didn't even recognize him. She thought he was a gardener. Yes, Mary Magdalene the lady that knew Jesus very well didn't even recognize him. Wow, great eye witness accounts. And those accounts are in the Bible which should confirm this story.

Now outside the Bible, not one eye witness account. Weird.

Thanks for correcting me for my error. It was actually more than 500.

1 Corinthians 15:6

After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep.

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

Ok, you obviously have not read the Bible and you obviously are going by what someone else claimed. Where in the Bible did it say there were 500 eye witness accounts? Secondly, the people he "appeared to" didn't even recognize him. Two people walking down a path claimed they saw Jesus but said it didn't look like him. ??? Jesus also appeared to Mary Magdalene and she didn't even recognize him. She thought he was a gardener. Yes, Mary Magdalene the lady that knew Jesus very well didn't even recognize him. Wow, great eye witness accounts. And those accounts are in the Bible which should confirm this story.

Now outside the Bible, not one eye witness account. Weird.

Resurection appearances of Jesus:

http://www.abideinchrist.com/messages/resurrectionjesus.html

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

the people he "appeared to" didn't even recognize him. Two people walking down a path claimed they saw Jesus but said it didn't look like him. ??? Jesus also appeared to Mary Magdalene and she didn't even recognize him. She thought he was a gardener. Yes, Mary Magdalene the lady that knew Jesus very well didn't even recognize him. Wow, great eye witness accounts. And those accounts are in the Bible which should confirm this story.

It's is no wonder they did not recognize him; Jesus was supposed to be dead! The surprise and the shock of seeing a close companion, or anyone else for that matter, who was supposed to be dead, would be enormous.

 

[totalnoob]

[FONT=TimesNewRoman,Bold]Features of the Stone Covering Jesus’ Tomb[/FONT]​

The stone isn't even rolled away in several versions of the story. The 4 gospels get SO MANY details wrong regarding the "empty tomb". I challenge you to read them horizontally (first read the account of a particular event in Mark, then skip to the same event in Luke, Matthew, John, etc). In regards to the empty tomb, ask yourself..

Who made it to the tomb first? It depends which gospel you read.

Did Mary go by herself, or with other people? It depends which gospel you read.

How many people were there altogether? 2? 3? 4? 5? It depends which gospel you read.

Where was the stone? Was it in place or was it already rolled away? It depends which gospel you read.

Who was waiting for them at the tomb? One man? Two men? Or one angel descended from heaven?? It depends which gospel you read.

What are they told?..to meet Jesus in Galilee or that they should stay and meet him in Jerusalem? It depends which gospel you read.

Do they tell the disciples, or do they run away and say nothing because they were afraid? It depends which gospel you read.

If they told the disciples, what do the disciples do..go to Galilee or stay in Jerusalem? It depends which gospel you read.

The answers to the above questions are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT depending on which account you happen to be reading. Remember, this is supposedly the MOST IMPORTANT STORY in the MOST IMPORTANT BOOK in the history of the universe. These words were inspired by the creator of the universe, yet the stories are in fundamental conflict with each other in many ways. God couldn't even get the story of his son's death straight..the most important event in human history according to Christianity, so why the hell should we believe any of the other magical bullshit in your favorite book?