Intention of the gospel writers

ymalmsteen887
Posts: 306
Joined: 2011-02-04
User is offlineOffline
Intention of the gospel writers

I would to know what the intentions of the writers of the gospels and epistles were if this stuff wasnt real than why is it written the way it is.

I dont beileve its true but i cant imagine how people could make this stuff up. Are the books we have know the way they were always written and why are they written the way they are like when jesus does miracles and the priests say he is a devil. Obviously it didnt happen so what was the stories purpose.

Also is the story of lazarus a complete fabrication it has to be people dont come back from the dead so who made it up and when.

Im also suspcious of pauls vision that has to be a fabrication to because if he hated christians then why would he have a visoin of jesus obvioulsy he didnt know what he looked like was paul really making this all up with some self serving purpose in mind.

This stuff really frustrates me because i want to know how these stuff can be made up it doesnt happen today anymore.

Ive also read The Evolutionof god and find it really interested but hard to follow.

Basically I want to know what it looked like say when someone was writting the book of exodus for example how could someone write this if it didnt happen and what was the intention.

Also i realize my writing struture is horrible.


mellestad
Moderator
Posts: 2927
Joined: 2009-08-19
User is offlineOffline
Well, who says the authors

Well, who says the authors didn't think it was real?

 

Myths often result from a long chain of retelling that grow a bit every time.  Jesus shared his lunch and fed some people some fish.  Jesus fed fish to fifty people with his lunch.  Jesus fed five hundred people with his lunch.  Jesus fed five hundred people, and he only had a couple fish.  etc.  I'm not saying that is what happened, but it is more likely than known physical constants being disregarded.

 

As for Lazarus...well, lots of myths are about people and gods coming back from the dead.  Probably because humans are fascinated by death and would like to avoid it.

 

Things like the book of Exodus are a bit 'easier' because they are ancient oral traditions eventually put to paper...an obvious case of the myth example.  They may (or may not) have truth in them, but like all myths once you cross the line into things that can't physically happen, or that have evidence pointing to the things not happening, then you discount the myth as being, well, a myth.

 

 

We can only speculate though.  When it comes to ancient history, Biblical or not, there are limits to what we can "know".  All we can do is figure things out the best we can.  Where theists get into trouble is they *assume* what their religion tells them is the truth, even when it is absurd, like people being raised from the dead.

 

Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.


B166ER
atheist
B166ER's picture
Posts: 557
Joined: 2010-03-01
User is offlineOffline
a couple of ideas

ymalmsteen887 wrote:
I would to know what the intentions of the writers of the gospels and epistles were if this stuff wasnt real than why is it written the way it is.

Either they were crazy and actually believed they were seeing impossible things happening, most likely because they were schizophrenic, or they realized they were spouting bullshit and just wanted the soldiers to commit genocide without mercy and the slaves and women to "learn their place" and deal with being dehumanized and oppressed.

At least those seem the most likely answers to me.

"This may shock you, but not everything in the bible is true." The only true statement ever to be uttered by Jean Chauvinism, sociopathic emotional terrorist.
"A Boss in Heaven is the best excuse for a boss on earth, therefore If God did exist, he would have to be abolished." Mikhail Bakunin
"The means in which you take,
dictate the ends in which you find yourself."
"Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government! Supreme leadership derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony!"
No Gods, No Masters!


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3705
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Actually, who says it

Well, actually, who says it doesn't happen today anymore?

The Book of Mormon was written in the 1800s, and all the Scientology books were written in the last 60 years. Both religions now have a huge following. It might be instructive to figure out why Joseph Smith and L. Ron Hubbard wrote their respective scriptures.

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


Lee2216
Theist
Lee2216's picture
Posts: 328
Joined: 2010-11-23
User is offlineOffline
B166ER wrote:Either they

B166ER wrote:
Either they were crazy and actually believed they were seeing impossible things happening, most likely because they were schizophrenic

Yeah sure, hundreds of people saw the risen Jesus at the same time and they all happened to be having the same hallucination at the exact same time. That's your best explanation?

b166er wrote:
or they realized they were spouting bullshit and just wanted the soldiers to commit genocide without mercy and the slaves and women to "learn their place" and deal with being dehumanized and oppressed.

So, your saying the apostles went around spouting BS that they knew was not true. They knew they would likely be killed for spouting that BS. That's what your going with? Would you risk your life for something that you knew was 100% false?

For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. Romans 1:20


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
To the OP:John 20:31 gives

To the OP:

John 20:31 gives their intent "But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name."

To Lee:

Your objections are moot because the only proof you have that all these people saw the "risen Jesus" is in the Gospels and in Paul's claims.

Those were written long after Jesus had died and the apostles had died or grown ancient. That's also why Paul was able to make Jesus a God (something that Jesus would not have allowed him to do if they had met in person).

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


mellestad
Moderator
Posts: 2927
Joined: 2009-08-19
User is offlineOffline
Lee2216 wrote:B166ER

Lee2216 wrote:

B166ER wrote:
Either they were crazy and actually believed they were seeing impossible things happening, most likely because they were schizophrenic

Yeah sure, hundreds of people saw the risen Jesus at the same time and they all happened to be having the same hallucination at the exact same time. That's your best explanation?

 

Yea, all those hundreds of eye witness accounts we have prove...oh, wait, we don't have any first hand eye witness accounts?  Uh-oh.

 

Not to mention we have hundreds of thousands of people who claim they see miracles for cult leaders, aliens, etc. every week so it isn't like eye-witness accounts are worth much anyway when it comes to supernatural claims.

 

As for the apostles, maybe they did, maybe they didn't.  Belief doesn't equal truth though.  Plenty of Muslims blow themselves up for their beliefs, does that make them right?  Plenty of Italians died in World War 2, was their political ideology "true"?

Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3705
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Lee2216 wrote:Yeah sure,

Lee2216 wrote:
Yeah sure, hundreds of people saw the risen Jesus at the same time and they all happened to be having the same hallucination at the exact same time. That's your best explanation?

---

So, your saying the apostles went around spouting BS that they knew was not true. They knew they would likely be killed for spouting that BS. That's what your going with? Would you risk your life for something that you knew was 100% false?

Hint. Arguments that contain multiple instances of question begging are not good arguments.

 

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


Ktulu
atheist
Posts: 1830
Joined: 2010-12-21
User is offlineOffline
The main thing you need to

The main thing you need to realize about Christianity is the fact that it is not even remotely novel in any respect.  Almost every aspect of it has derived from previous religions.  Perhaps some of the fables have a grain of truth to them, but if that is the case, it is a completely banal grain, as mellestad has pointed out.  The stories that made it in the bible, are there because they appealed emotionally to whomever presented them at the time.  

What I have a problem with is, why would you believe another human being that claims to have proof of a transcendent being, without any proof?  I mean, my 2 year old toddlers (twins) question almost everything I tell them with a "Why?".  When do we lose that "why?".   If someone walked up to you and told you that there are gremlins under his hat, you'd most likely ask for proof.  If a group of 10 people walked up to you and told you that said individual has gremlins under hat, you'd still ask for proof.  Why would you not ask for proof or at least a logical line of reasoning leading to to the claims made in the bible?  

Why would you start on the premise that they were telling the truth? Since when is, having lived ~2000 years ago, the equivalent of not being able to lie?  

 

"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc


ymalmsteen887
Posts: 306
Joined: 2011-02-04
User is offlineOffline
what about paul what was his

what about paul what was his intention and is he believed to be a real person.

 


ymalmsteen887
Posts: 306
Joined: 2011-02-04
User is offlineOffline
I know that the jesus didnt

I know that the jesus didnt fulfill the old testament prohecies so im wondering why they would subscribe him to them when they are obvisouly not to the point that its funny.

Also is moses believed to be a real person.


cj
atheistRational VIP!
cj's picture
Posts: 3330
Joined: 2007-01-05
User is offlineOffline
mellestad wrote:As for

mellestad wrote:


As for Lazarus...well, lots of myths are about people and gods coming back from the dead.  Probably because humans are fascinated by death and would like to avoid it.

 

People believed that you could arise from the dead - perhaps because of incidents like this:

http://www.kgw.com/home/Brain-dead-Washington-woman-comes-back-to-life-105635108.html

 

Quote:

The Washington State Patrol said a FedEx delivery truck struck a Toyota Camry after running a red light on Highway 395. The truck then slammed into the driver's side of the Mercury Monterey van.

Arbogast was unconscious but breathing and taken to Kennewick General Hospital, said investigators.

"We couldn't believe that this just happened," said her daughter Candice Duncan, who rushed with other family to be by her mother's side. "She's always, always, thought of other people first."

But relatives said doctors in Kennewick told them the crash had left her brain-dead, or at least, with no brain activity.

....

"He's there sitting at his chair at 2:30 in the morning," said Perry, "and the doctor calls and says … 'we have signs of life.'"

Ten hours after the crash, Harborview had found brain activity. They were calling, asking if they could perform surgery, said Perry.

"From being to the depths of losing your wife after 31 years, and then to find hope that she's still alive?" he said.

As shocked family members drove to Seattle from Hermiston and Umatilla, Oregon, doctors removed a blood clot from Karen's brain and cut into her skull to relieve pressure, said relatives.

And it appears to be working. As of Thursday night, Karen Arbogast's condition has been upgraded to serious, said a hospital spokesperson. Though unconscious, she's even moving.

...

 

But if you check a little further, you realize it wasn't a miracle after all.

http://www.hermistonherald.com/news/article_02492b62-e3cb-11df-9a60-001cc4c03286.html

 

Quote:

“We’re faced with the same decision we had to make (Oct. 19),” Carl Arbogast, Karen’s husband, said Tuesday. “Barring complete divine healing, we’re getting ready to say goodbye.”

...

Despite rumors that she was progressing and beginning to recover, Carl Arbogast said there has been no response and the extent of the damages would make life difficult for the once-active volunteer, wife and mother if she did wake from her coma. The response in hope, encouragement and prayer, however, has been overwhelming for the family.

...

 

Lots of prayers, but no miracle.

Primitive medicine, no eeg's, no ekg's, no stethoscopes, no knowledge of circulatory systems, etc.  What on earth would you expect?  Stories of people "rising" from the dead when they weren't dead to begin with.  No duh.

I noticed the bible does not comment on Lazarus' state of mind after being revived.

 

-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.

"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken

"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.


ex-minister
atheistHigh Level ModeratorSilver Member
ex-minister's picture
Posts: 1708
Joined: 2010-01-29
User is offlineOffline
Human imagination

ymalmsteen887 wrote:

I would to know what the intentions of the writers of the gospels and epistles were if this stuff wasnt real than why is it written the way it is.

I dont beileve its true but i cant imagine how people could make this stuff up. Are the books we have know the way they were always written and why are they written the way they are like when jesus does miracles and the priests say he is a devil. Obviously it didnt happen so what was the stories purpose.

Also is the story of lazarus a complete fabrication it has to be people dont come back from the dead so who made it up and when.

Im also suspcious of pauls vision that has to be a fabrication to because if he hated christians then why would he have a visoin of jesus obvioulsy he didnt know what he looked like was paul really making this all up with some self serving purpose in mind.

This stuff really frustrates me because i want to know how these stuff can be made up it doesnt happen today anymore.

Ive also read The Evolutionof god and find it really interested but hard to follow.

Basically I want to know what it looked like say when someone was writting the book of exodus for example how could someone write this if it didnt happen and what was the intention.

Also i realize my writing struture is horrible.

The creativity and imagination of human apes are impressive. The fiction is that bible believers say nothing is like the bible, which that simply is not the case.

Have you seen any good movies, like Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, Avatar? How did they come up with that stuff. Do those guys really have all that power? How did Spock in the Star Trek movie come back to life after he was dead? 

 

Got a bible

quiz for you. Guess whether this text is from the Old Testament or the New Testament. Can you identify the book of the bible?

 

=======

We give thee, Lord, sovereignty over the whole world.

Sit thou down in might; be exalted in thy command.

Thy weapon shall never lose its power; it shall crush thy foe.

O Lord, spare the life of him that putteth his trust in thee

 

He made ready the bow, he chose his weapon,

He slung a spear upon him and fastened it...

He raised the club, in his right hand he grasped it,

The bow and the quiver he hung at his side.

He set the lightning in front of him,

With burning flame he filled his body.

 

Then the Lord raised the thunderbolt, his mighty weapon,

He mounted the chariot, the storm unequaled for terror,

He harnessed and yoked unto it four horses,

Destructive, ferocious, overwhelming, and swift of pace;

 

His garment was a glowing flame , he was clothed with terror,

With overpowering brightness his head was crowned.

Then he set out, he took his way,

And toward the raging Tiamat he set his face.

======

Which do you say? Don't look it up before you guess.

Here are some choices.

 

a) The book of Revelation, chapter 15

b) Psalms 74

c) Proverbs 22

d) Deuteronomy 17

If you reply here I will tell you.

 

 

 

 

Religion Kills !!!

Numbers 31:17-18 - Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

http://jesus-needs-money.blogspot.com/


ymalmsteen887
Posts: 306
Joined: 2011-02-04
User is offlineOffline
here is a good example some

here is a good example some people say that when satan is mentioned  to give a census in another book its god they say this is because satan is merely and angel of god which is the one i most agree with since they both did the same thing but some people say its because later they changed it to satan so that god wouldnt look bad. To some christians this may look like atheists cant get their story straight.


ymalmsteen887
Posts: 306
Joined: 2011-02-04
User is offlineOffline
Psalms 74

Psalms 74


ymalmsteen887
Posts: 306
Joined: 2011-02-04
User is offlineOffline
Psalms 74

Psalms 74


cj
atheistRational VIP!
cj's picture
Posts: 3330
Joined: 2007-01-05
User is offlineOffline
ymalmsteen887 wrote: I know

ymalmsteen887 wrote:

I know that the jesus didnt fulfill the old testament prohecies so im wondering why they would subscribe him to them when they are obvisouly not to the point that its funny.

Also is moses believed to be a real person.

 

If you really search, you will find that most of the stories in the bible are very similar to other myths.  Jesus and Mithras - did you know Paul was raised as a Mithran?  Try looking through The Mythmaker: Paul and the Invention of Christianity by Hyam MacCoby.

http://www.amazon.com/Mythmaker-Paul-Invention-Christianity/dp/0760707871/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1297201901&sr=8-2

If there was a Moses who really was raised as a foster brother to the Pharaoh, we would have found some reference to him in Egypt.  Not a trace.  See The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts by Neil Asher Silberman and Israel Finkelstein.  There is a newer book, which I haven't read yet, The Quest for the Historical Israel: Debating Archaeology and the History of Early Israel by Finkelstein, et al.  I guess he got really tired of responding to all the biblical scholars who just didn't want to let go of their religious viewpoint.

When the earliest part of bible was written, there is no archaeological evidence of monotheism in what we now think of as Israel and Palestine.  I have been of the opinion for some years that the bible was written for the same reasons L. Ron Hubbard dreamed up scientology:

 

Wikiquote wrote:

  • Scientology is bullshit! Man, I was there the night L. Ron Hubbard invented it, for Christ's sakes! ... We were sitting around one night... who else was there? Alfred Bester, and Cyril Kornbluth, and Lester del Rey, and Ron Hubbard, who was making a penny a word, and had been for years. And he said "This bullshit's got to stop!" He says, "I gotta get money." He says, "I want to get rich". And somebody said, "why don't you invent a new religion? They're always big." We were clowning! You know, "Become Elmer Gantry! You'll make a fortune!" He says, "I'm going to do it."
    • "The Real Harlan Ellison" in Wings (November-December 1978) p. 32

 

It's all about money and control.

 

 

-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.

"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken

"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
mellestad wrote:   Yea,

mellestad wrote:

   Yea, all those hundreds of eye witness accounts we have prove...oh, wait, we don't have any first hand eye witness accounts?  Uh-oh.

 

We have both, the body of Elvis, and people with first hand accounts who will swear that they saw him at the mall.

So, is it 'logical' to conclude that Elvis is no longer dead?

Would it be more, or less 'logical' to conclude that he was no longer dead if his dead body was missing?

We're talking about Elvis. We have YouTube of Elvis and the president! We have his Cadillac, man!

 

Would a missing body, and eye witness accounts be sufficient for you to be absolutely certain Elvis was alive?

Maybe for you.

But not even close, for me.

 

What's that you say?

"But, Elvis is not believed to be the son of god!"

 

No.

He's 1 better.

A quick Google search on "Elvis is god", turns up 7,580,00 results.

Can you falsify that Elvis is god?

Of course not.

So you must accept that he could be a god, because he meets the criteria of a god.

It is therefore entirely possible for Elvis to actually be god, as much (if not infinitely more) than it is that the Jesus legend is the actual son of a god.

 

Don't be dishonest.

It's AS possible.

A god can do anything.

 

I think if there was some god, he'd want to sample some choice earthly pvssy. 

He'd be a fool not to!

Doesn't every great chef taste his 'creations'?

 

 

 

 

 

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


ymalmsteen887
Posts: 306
Joined: 2011-02-04
User is offlineOffline
Also what was muhammads

Also what was muhammads intention it doesnt seem like it was for money.

What was he setting out to do that he felt like christianity and judaism.


ex-minister
atheistHigh Level ModeratorSilver Member
ex-minister's picture
Posts: 1708
Joined: 2010-01-29
User is offlineOffline
Ktulu wrote:Since when is,

Ktulu wrote:

Since when is, having lived ~2000 years ago, the equivalent of not being able to lie?  

Well put.  

Religion Kills !!!

Numbers 31:17-18 - Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

http://jesus-needs-money.blogspot.com/


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
ymalmsteen887 wrote:Also

ymalmsteen887 wrote:

Also what was muhammads intention it doesnt seem like it was for money.

What was he setting out to do that he felt like christianity and judaism.

duhhhh....

 

Same thing they do today, with the various religions.

Perpetuate myths.

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


ymalmsteen887
Posts: 306
Joined: 2011-02-04
User is offlineOffline
ex minister

a) The book of Revelation, chapter 15

b) Psalms 74

c) Proverbs 22

d) Deuteronomy 17

If you reply here I will tell you.

Answer B


ex-minister
atheistHigh Level ModeratorSilver Member
ex-minister's picture
Posts: 1708
Joined: 2010-01-29
User is offlineOffline
Enuma Elish

ymalmsteen887 wrote:

a) The book of Revelation, chapter 15

b) Psalms 74

c) Proverbs 22

d) Deuteronomy 17

If you reply here I will tell you.

Answer B

 

Well, I was being tricky. It actually was not in the Bible at all. It is the Enuma Elish. It is Babylonian scripture written hundreds of years before the anything in the Bible. It is very likely the inspiration for the Bible or through oral tradition they copied it. What struck me as a long time Bible reader how the language was so familiar. We are told the bible is so unique. This demonstrates it is not and more so because it preceded the bible. Just because something is familiar doesn't mean it is right, but that is a human proclivity. 

 

Here is a link to the full text.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/ane/enuma.htm

Religion Kills !!!

Numbers 31:17-18 - Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

http://jesus-needs-money.blogspot.com/


ymalmsteen887
Posts: 306
Joined: 2011-02-04
User is offlineOffline
ymalmsteen887 wrote:  Also

ymalmsteen887 wrote:

 

Also what was muhammads intention it doesnt seem like it was for money.

What was he setting out to do that he felt like christianity and judaism.

 

 

duhhhh....

 

Same thing they do today, with the various religions.

Perpetuate myths

Thats not a very detailed explanation.


ymalmsteen887
Posts: 306
Joined: 2011-02-04
User is offlineOffline
ymalmsteen887 wrote:  Also

ymalmsteen887 wrote:

 

Also what was muhammads intention it doesnt seem like it was for money.

What was he setting out to do that he felt like christianity and judaism.

 

 

duhhhh....

 

Same thing they do today, with the various religions.

Perpetuate myths

Thats not a very detailed explanation.


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
ymalmsteen887 wrote:Thats

ymalmsteen887 wrote:

Thats not a very detailed explanation.

Occam's Razor.

I don't need to detail any explanations to my claim.

I make the claim that ancient scriptures, pertaining to gods, are merely myths.

Can you falsify my claim?

My claim is falsifiable, under certain conditions.

 

Can you provide everyone the conditions that are observable that make my claim 100% false?

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


mellestad
Moderator
Posts: 2927
Joined: 2009-08-19
User is offlineOffline
ex-minister

ex-minister wrote:

ymalmsteen887 wrote:

a) The book of Revelation, chapter 15

b) Psalms 74

c) Proverbs 22

d) Deuteronomy 17

If you reply here I will tell you.

Answer B

 

Well, I was being tricky. It actually was not in the Bible at all. It is the Enuma Elish. It is Babylonian scripture written hundreds of years before the anything in the Bible. It is very likely the inspiration for the Bible or through oral tradition they copied it. What struck me as a long time Bible reader how the language was so familiar. We are told the bible is so unique. This demonstrates it is not and more so because it preceded the bible. Just because something is familiar doesn't mean it is right, but that is a human proclivity. 

 

Here is a link to the full text.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/ane/enuma.htm

 

Lol, I knew it wasn't from the Bible, but I thought it was something more contemporary like a Thor comic book.

Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.


lalib
atheist
lalib's picture
Posts: 134
Joined: 2010-12-31
User is offlineOffline
redneF wrote:ymalmsteen887

redneF wrote:

ymalmsteen887 wrote:

Also what was muhammads intention it doesnt seem like it was for money.

What was he setting out to do that he felt like christianity and judaism.

duhhhh....

 

Same thing they do today, with the various religions.

Perpetuate myths.

 

I highly doubt that the founders of various religions had the intention of merely perpetuating myths. I think the most powerful thing to hint at what Muhammad or Jesus's iintentions are folks like John Smith and L Ron Hubbard. Clearly, the founders of religion are after power and any derivation of power.

 

@ymalmsteen

While it may seem that Muhammad's aim wasn't money, most likey he was just trying to get laid as a derivative of having power.


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
lalib wrote:redneF wrote: 

lalib wrote:

redneF wrote:

  Same thing they do today, with the various religions.

Perpetuate myths.

 

I highly doubt that the founders of various religions had the intention of merely perpetuating myths.

What you highly doubt means nothing, just as being highly sure of something, means nothing.

The fact is, that you don't know.

Either way.

 

You can speculate their accounts are real, and correct.

I can speculate that their accounts are bogus, and fairytales.

 

You say you have the facts on your side?

No.

The facts that humans lie, trumps your 'facts' exponentially.

That fact is a truth.

Truth has more veracity than 'speculation'.

That's another inescapable truth.

Fact and truth are interchangeable with each other.

That is a fact.

'Speculations' are not interchageable with either 'fact' or 'truth'.

 

See the cycle?...

 

The possibility that a speculation is true, or false, is equal. It can also be non applicable.

If you try and negate these, you are more interested in arguing in favour of what you 'feel' is true, than in determining the actual 'truth'.

That's why there's the ad nauseum 'appeal to emotions' used in 'arguing' in favour of an idea.

 

Emotions (the 'heart') have got nothing to do with the 'truth'.

The 'truth' doesn't care about you.

Never did, never will.

Because it's not a living thing.

It's not even an idea.

It's an abstract.

 

You have 'no' power over the truth.

A god created truth?

 

You don't truthfully know that.

Therefore you don't have the actual truth...

 

 

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


ymalmsteen887
Posts: 306
Joined: 2011-02-04
User is offlineOffline
Thats the whole reason I

Thats the whole reason I wanted to start this topic is because i wanted to have some idea what their intentions were i doubt it was to start a myth that would be pointless.


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
You mean there's no

You mean there's no conceivable agenda that you could think of, that would be the motivation to create such lies?

Wow, you do have a whole lotta faith in mortal men....

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3273
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
ymalmsteen887 wrote:Thats

ymalmsteen887 wrote:

Thats the whole reason I wanted to start this topic is because i wanted to have some idea what their intentions were i doubt it was to start a myth that would be pointless.

I think the thing that needs to truly be understood on that is not about the birth of Christianity but about the birth of religion in general.

There are many factors which contributed to the birth of religion. You can look them up in anthropological studies, neuroscientific studies, and quite a body of work on this very subject.

Problem that alot of people have when trying to figure out the origins of Christianity or Islam, in my opinion, is the special category that they are placing these religions in.

They are no different than the same circumstances that gave birth to the religions that dominated Ancient Egypt for thousands of years or the practices of Pagan Europe before the arrival of Christianity in the beginning of the dark ages.

There are many theories about what could have possibly given birth to god belief. But ultimately, the answer to the questions about organized religion comes from the root of all religious belief or god belief in general.

In my personal opinion, to try and dissect the original intent of manuscripts that are thousands of years old, shrouded in all sorts of symbolism and have been translated and copied and potentially mistranslated thousands of times to actually be a futile exercise.

This was coming from a time period in history where man was filled with superstitious ideals and had only the most basic ideas of how the world around him worked. The Biblical authors had no understanding of disease, of astronomy, of biology, of germs, of proper sanitation, of what the Sun was, of what the Earth was, where the seasons came from or even what dreams were when you went to sleep at night.

I personally do not see lending any credence to the biblical writers anymore than I would lend credence to the Egyptian Book of the Dead.

But that is just my opinion.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


ymalmsteen887
Posts: 306
Joined: 2011-02-04
User is offlineOffline
I feared this to be the

I feared this to be the case im an atheist.

I knew that if i didnt say otherwise people soupld just guess im a theist saying i believe it because i dont see how they could have made it up.

I find the bible ridiculous I just want to understand the thinking of people back then i why they would say all this stuff if it wasnt real.


ymalmsteen887
Posts: 306
Joined: 2011-02-04
User is offlineOffline
I feared this to be the

I feared this to be the case im an atheist.

I knew that if i didnt say otherwise people soupld just guess im a theist saying i believe it because i dont see how they could have made it up.

I find the bible ridiculous I just want to understand the thinking of people back then i why they would say all this stuff if it wasnt real.


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3273
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
ymalmsteen887 wrote:Also is

ymalmsteen887 wrote:

Also is moses believed to be a real person.

There is absolutely zero evidence to support that a Moses ever existed.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3273
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
ymalmsteen887

ymalmsteen887 wrote:

I feared this to be the case im an atheist.

I knew that if i didnt say otherwise people soupld just guess im a theist saying i believe it because i dont see how they could have made it up.

I find the bible ridiculous I just want to understand the thinking of people back then i why they would say all this stuff if it wasnt real.

Check out this video and see if this helps you :

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFrkjEgUDZA

 

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


ymalmsteen887
Posts: 306
Joined: 2011-02-04
User is offlineOffline
That video only confirmed

That video only confirmed what i already know to be true that the bible is ridicuolous. It doesnt explain how they got their ideas or how you can write about something that is obviosly not there.


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
ymalmsteen887 wrote:That

ymalmsteen887 wrote:

That video only confirmed what i already know to be true that the bible is ridicuolous. It doesnt explain how they got their ideas or how you can write about something that is obviosly not there.

Wanna know the truth about ancient claims?

Ask an atheist!

We don't make sh1t up.

 

Jesus is supposed to be considered the messiah and the son of god because he's special? Because he was rumoured to be immaculately conceived of the virgin mary?

You think that's divine?

Here's the other ancient claims...

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlhgFILnDRw&feature=related

 

 

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


Jeffrick
High Level DonorRational VIP!SuperfanGold Member
Jeffrick's picture
Posts: 2376
Joined: 2008-03-25
User is offlineOffline
tradition

ymalmsteen887 wrote:

That video only confirmed what i already know to be true that the bible is ridicuolous. It doesnt explain how they got their ideas or how you can write about something that is obviosly not there.

 

 

                   They wrote down the oral traditions,  the campfire stories. It is one reason the four gospels follow the same story line.  The stories themselves were handed down,  by word of mouth for centurys before they were written ,  in stone , in other cultures. 

 

 

                   All aspects  of the jesus charactor come direct from the Persian God Mithras.  Jesus Christos isn't even a name IT IS a title; it means "gods annointed savior"  which is what Paul of Tarsus turned Mithras into [Mithras means 'Son of the Sun god'].    Storys of the flood and the exodus come from stone tablets first written in the Summerian swamp lands of southern Iraq.

 

    

                   Stories of two brothers feuding seem to come from nomadic Indo-European tribes. Summerian traditions start with Adam and Eve then goes to Enos.  When the Indo-European Hittites enter the mideast stories about Cain & Abel [also Esau & Jacob] enter the folklore. Persian traditions and tales added Seth as the third son and father of Enos.

 

 

                    The Indo-Europeans also gave us tales of  Romulus and Remus,  Castor and Pollex,  Dahram and Veer. The tales were all retold a thousand times before they were written down.

"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."

VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"

If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?


Lee2216
Theist
Lee2216's picture
Posts: 328
Joined: 2010-11-23
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:To Lee:Your

jcgadfly wrote:

To Lee:

Your objections are moot because the only proof you have that all these people saw the "risen Jesus" is in the Gospels and in Paul's claims.

Those were written long after Jesus had died and the apostles had died or grown ancient. That's also why Paul was able to make Jesus a God (something that Jesus would not have allowed him to do if they had met in person).

Jc, archaeological discoveries have confirmed the accuracy of the New Testament manuscripts. These were written approximately 30 to 50 years after Jesus' death which is not long at all. Your continuous claims that Paul wanted to make Jesus a God have no foundation. Paul appealed to his audience's knowledge of the fact that Christ had been seen by more than 500 people at one time. Paul reminded them that the majority of those people were still alive and could be questioned if they did not believe him. Another crucial factor that you forget is that He appeared to those who were hostile or unconvinced also.

A time period of 30 to 50 years is not long enough to establish a myth that concerns a historical fact. Contemporaries of JFK would in no way be able to make up a myth that JFK was killed with a bow and arrow. You would have people that were actually there and saw with their own eyes his brain fall out the back of his head and heard with their own ears the sound of gunshots. If Jesus' resurrection where a myth it could have and would have been easily refuted by His contemporaries. Your the one continually making up myths not Christians. Sorry for making you look silly....oh that's right your making yourself look ridiculous!

 

For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. Romans 1:20


Lee2216
Theist
Lee2216's picture
Posts: 328
Joined: 2010-11-23
User is offlineOffline
mellestad wrote:Yea, all

mellestad wrote:
Yea, all those hundreds of eye witness accounts we have prove...oh, wait, we don't have any first hand eye witness accounts?  Uh-oh.

 You are incorrect! We have many eyewitness accounts. Paul appealed to his audience's knowledge of the fact that Christ had been seen by more than 500 people at one time. Paul reminded them that the majority of those people were still alive and could be questioned if they did not believe him. Another crucial factor that you forget is that He appeared to those who were hostile or unconvinced also.

 

mellestad wrote:
As for the apostles, maybe they did, maybe they didn't.  Belief doesn't equal truth though.  Plenty of Muslims blow themselves up for their beliefs, does that make them right?  Plenty of Italians died in World War 2, was their political ideology "true"?

I agree, belief in something doesn't mean it's true. So I guess your saying that you would risk your life to spread the gospel of snarfwidget i.e. something you know to be 100% false? Don't insult my intelligence by ignoring the question. I think you and I both know you wouldn't and I wouldn't expect you to.

For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. Romans 1:20


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Lee2216 wrote:jcgadfly

Lee2216 wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

To Lee:

Your objections are moot because the only proof you have that all these people saw the "risen Jesus" is in the Gospels and in Paul's claims.

Those were written long after Jesus had died and the apostles had died or grown ancient. That's also why Paul was able to make Jesus a God (something that Jesus would not have allowed him to do if they had met in person).

Jc, archaeological discoveries have confirmed the accuracy of the New Testament manuscripts. These were written approximately 30 to 50 years after Jesus' death which is not long at all. Your continuous claims that Paul wanted to make Jesus a God have no foundation. Paul appealed to his audience's knowledge of the fact that Christ had been seen by more than 500 people at one time. Paul reminded them that the majority of those people were still alive and could be questioned if they did not believe him. Another crucial factor that you forget is that He appeared to those who were hostile or unconvinced also.

A time period of 30 to 50 years is not long enough to establish a myth that concerns a historical fact. Contemporaries of JFK would in no way be able to make up a myth that JFK was killed with a bow and arrow. You would have people that were actually there and saw with their own eyes his brain fall out the back of his head and heard with their own ears the sound of gunshots. If Jesus' resurrection where a myth it could have and would have been easily refuted by His contemporaries. Your the one continually making up myths not Christians. Sorry for making you look silly....oh that's right your making yourself look ridiculous!

 

Archeological discoveries as in "Archaeologists have dug up a town called <X> and <X> was mentioned in the NT so that makes Jesus the son of God"? I hope you have more than that. Otherwise you'd have to accept Spider-Man as real because books chronicling his life and adventures are set in New York City and New York City is a real place.

Paul's stories were written 30-50 years after Jesus (allegedly) died. The gospels were written 40-110 years after Paul had written his work. Paul's converts (who wrote the gospels) had Paul's work and the prophets in front of them while they were creating the characters. In I Cor 15:6, Paul did not appeal to his audience's knowledge of Christ being seen by more than 500 people at one time - he merely asserted it and said "trust me" (the Greek Christians would have been unable to contact those few who were alive when Jesus was and he knew that). A crucial factor you ignore is that fictional characters can be written to do amazing things. There may have been a man named Jesus but the god character Paul morphed Jesus into isn't a real person.

I do like the way you try to draw comparisons between Jesus and JFK. and you did bring up an important distinction that strengthens my case (though you didn't mean to). There were people at the Plaza who saw Kennedy die. With Jesus, all you have are stories written decades after the fact by converts of a man who never actually met him.

30-50 years isn't enough for a myth to be made? Not sure about that. I am sure that a century and a half is more than enough time and that's what you have in this case.

Your assertions don't make me look silly. They do show that you've never actually read your holy book. Since you started with unsupported assertions and ended with ad hominem can I assume you concede the argument?

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


B166ER
atheist
B166ER's picture
Posts: 557
Joined: 2010-03-01
User is offlineOffline
HILARIOUS!

Lee2216 wrote:
archaeological discoveries have confirmed the accuracy of the New Testament manuscripts.

Ummm... I'd like to see this archeological evidence, as I have loved archeology all my life and have always read everything on the subject I can get my hands on, as well as having a few friends taking university level archeology classes, and not one piece of evidence I have seen has shown anything of the sort! I think you have been taken in by the "Dr." (forever in quotes) Kent Hovind/Ken Ham bullshit. If you have this archeological evidence, instead of just telling us you have seen it, give us links to the information itself. Show us that it's credible and we'll listen. Without it, you're just blowing smoke up our asses. If you can't provide actual evidence then you're still just making unsubstantiated claims, and we as atheists are rarely, if ever, swayed by "just so" stories.

Lee2216 wrote:
These were written approximately 30 to 50 years after Jesus' death which is not long at all...

...A time period of 30 to 50 years is not long enough to establish a myth that concerns a historical fact. Contemporaries of JFK would in no way be able to make up a myth that JFK was killed with a bow and arrow. You would have people that were actually there and saw with their own eyes his brain fall out the back of his head and heard with their own ears the sound of gunshots.

*cough cough* grassy knoll *cough cough*

Lee2216 wrote:
Your the one continually making up myths not Christians.

Well, part of that is correct. Christians didn't make up the myths, they just stole them from already created religions!

So again, instead of just claiming that you have evidence, SHOW US! We're waiting...

"This may shock you, but not everything in the bible is true." The only true statement ever to be uttered by Jean Chauvinism, sociopathic emotional terrorist.
"A Boss in Heaven is the best excuse for a boss on earth, therefore If God did exist, he would have to be abolished." Mikhail Bakunin
"The means in which you take,
dictate the ends in which you find yourself."
"Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government! Supreme leadership derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony!"
No Gods, No Masters!


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Lee2216 wrote:mellestad

Lee2216 wrote:

mellestad wrote:
Yea, all those hundreds of eye witness accounts we have prove...oh, wait, we don't have any first hand eye witness accounts?  Uh-oh.

 You are incorrect! We have many eyewitness accounts. Paul appealed to his audience's knowledge of the fact that Christ had been seen by more than 500 people at one time. Paul reminded them that the majority of those people were still alive and could be questioned if they did not believe him. Another crucial factor that you forget is that He appeared to those who were hostile or unconvinced also.

 

mellestad wrote:
As for the apostles, maybe they did, maybe they didn't.  Belief doesn't equal truth though.  Plenty of Muslims blow themselves up for their beliefs, does that make them right?  Plenty of Italians died in World War 2, was their political ideology "true"?

I agree, belief in something doesn't mean it's true. So I guess your saying that you would risk your life to spread the gospel of snarfwidget i.e. something you know to be 100% false? Don't insult my intelligence by ignoring the question. I think you and I both know you wouldn't and I wouldn't expect you to.

The stories you are basing this on have nothing to do with the genuine people (except for using their names) so neither of us know whether they believed the stories or not.

Would people spread the idea of something they know to be 100% false? Actually they do it more frequently than you might think. The "birther" movement and the "Obama's a Muslim" groups come to mind.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


B166ER
atheist
B166ER's picture
Posts: 557
Joined: 2010-03-01
User is offlineOffline
Wow...

mellestad wrote:
Yea, all those hundreds of eye witness accounts we have prove...oh, wait, we don't have any first hand eye witness accounts?  Uh-oh.

Lee2216 wrote:
  You are incorrect! We have many eyewitness accounts. Paul appealed to his audience's knowledge of the fact that Christ had been seen by more than 500 people at one time. Paul reminded them that the majority of those people were still alive and could be questioned if they did not believe him. Another crucial factor that you forget is that He appeared to those who were hostile or unconvinced also.

Incorrect? Ummm... where again is this account of eyewitnesses being swayed and hundreds of people claiming to see this mythical person? Oh right! It's the very same book making these claims AND NOWHERE ELSE! So please show us these other accounts that back up these claims.

Any book can make any claim. Both The Communist Manifesto and Mein Kampf make all sorts of claims, but just because they were written in a book doesn't make them true. Same for your book.

mellestad wrote:
As for the apostles, maybe they did, maybe they didn't.  Belief doesn't equal truth though.  Plenty of Muslims blow themselves up for their beliefs, does that make them right?  Plenty of Italians died in World War 2, was their political ideology "true"?

Lee2216 wrote:
I agree, belief in something doesn't mean it's true. So I guess your saying that you would risk your life to spread the gospel of snarfwidget i.e. something you know to be 100% false? Don't insult my intelligence by ignoring the question. I think you and I both know you wouldn't and I wouldn't expect you to.

Yeah, because there have never been any Elmer Gantry types in the world willing to sell bullshit that they KNEW was bullshit just for power... oh wait...

"This may shock you, but not everything in the bible is true." The only true statement ever to be uttered by Jean Chauvinism, sociopathic emotional terrorist.
"A Boss in Heaven is the best excuse for a boss on earth, therefore If God did exist, he would have to be abolished." Mikhail Bakunin
"The means in which you take,
dictate the ends in which you find yourself."
"Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government! Supreme leadership derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony!"
No Gods, No Masters!


mellestad
Moderator
Posts: 2927
Joined: 2009-08-19
User is offlineOffline
Lee2216 wrote:mellestad

Lee2216 wrote:

mellestad wrote:
Yea, all those hundreds of eye witness accounts we have prove...oh, wait, we don't have any first hand eye witness accounts?  Uh-oh.

 You are incorrect! We have many eyewitness accounts. Paul appealed to his audience's knowledge of the fact that Christ had been seen by more than 500 people at one time. Paul reminded them that the majority of those people were still alive and could be questioned if they did not believe him. Another crucial factor that you forget is that He appeared to those who were hostile or unconvinced also.

 

mellestad wrote:
As for the apostles, maybe they did, maybe they didn't.  Belief doesn't equal truth though.  Plenty of Muslims blow themselves up for their beliefs, does that make them right?  Plenty of Italians died in World War 2, was their political ideology "true"?

I agree, belief in something doesn't mean it's true. So I guess your saying that you would risk your life to spread the gospel of snarfwidget i.e. something you know to be 100% false? Don't insult my intelligence by ignoring the question. I think you and I both know you wouldn't and I wouldn't expect you to.

One man saying a bunch of people saw something does not equal those people seeing the thing, or even that those people thought they saw those things.  I can give you contemporary accounts of stuff just as far out and you wouldn't believe any of it.  Why would you deny contemporary accounts and most ancient accounts, but take a small subset of ancient accounts as truth?  This genuinely confuses me.

 

Your comment about snarfwidgets...I'm confused again.  What does your response have to do with what I wrote?  At all?  Q: "Plenty of Muslims die for their beliefs, why are their deaths invalid but the apostles are valid?" A: "You would die for a false and absurd belief?!  Don't insult me!"  Seriously, where the fuck did that even come from?

Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.


Lee2216
Theist
Lee2216's picture
Posts: 328
Joined: 2010-11-23
User is offlineOffline
mellestad wrote:Plenty of

mellestad wrote:

Plenty of Muslims die for their beliefs, why are their deaths invalid but the apostles are valid?"

Because Muslims strap bombs to themselves and kill others who won't convert to their religion that's why it's invalid. The apostles wouldn't risk their lives promoting the goods news if they knew it was a myth. Understand?

For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. Romans 1:20


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3273
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
ymalmsteen887 wrote:That

ymalmsteen887 wrote:

That video only confirmed what i already know to be true that the bible is ridicuolous. It doesnt explain how they got their ideas or how you can write about something that is obviosly not there.

As I have previously mentioned, this was at a time when humanity was in it's infancy and people had only the vaguest idea of how the world worked.

Obviously if you noted all of the superstitious practices of the men in those times pointed out in the video, it was obvious where it came from.

It's no different than primitive tribes today that believe the stars give signs about the nature of crops or which direction in which they need to migrate.

Why is this seemingly such a difficult concept to grasp ? It's no great mystery where people get their superstitions from.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
You don't have any proof

You don't have any proof these guys were martyred - let alone that they were martyred for what they believed.

The only proof that you have theat these guys even existed is a set of books that were written long after these guys were around.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


B166ER
atheist
B166ER's picture
Posts: 557
Joined: 2010-03-01
User is offlineOffline
Because?

mellestad wrote:
Plenty of Muslims die for their beliefs, why are their deaths invalid but the apostles are valid?"

Lee2216 wrote:
Because Muslims strap bombs to themselves and kill others who won't convert to their religion that's why it's invalid. 

And the Christian Crusaders in the Middle East never killed anyone who wouldn't convert... oh wait...

Lee2216 wrote:
The apostles wouldn't risk their lives promoting the goods news if they knew it was a myth. Understand?

And you know this how? From the one book making these claims...

"This may shock you, but not everything in the bible is true." The only true statement ever to be uttered by Jean Chauvinism, sociopathic emotional terrorist.
"A Boss in Heaven is the best excuse for a boss on earth, therefore If God did exist, he would have to be abolished." Mikhail Bakunin
"The means in which you take,
dictate the ends in which you find yourself."
"Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government! Supreme leadership derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony!"
No Gods, No Masters!


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3273
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
ymalmsteen887 wrote:That

ymalmsteen887 wrote:

That video only confirmed what i already know to be true that the bible is ridicuolous. It doesnt explain how they got their ideas or how you can write about something that is obviosly not there.

Where did the Egyptians get their ideas about Anubis, the afterlife and the Fields of the Sun God Ra ?

Where did Greeks get their idea of Apollo travelling across the sky to make the sunrise ?

Where did the Ancient Celts get the ideas of Samhain and the spirit world being open one night of the year ?

The Bible is no different, the superstitions of the men who invented them are no different than any of the other superstitions that were around at that time.

The fact that the Roman Empire adopted these ideals of Christianity and forced them on everyone else does not make these things complex in nature.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno