Atheism - any contradictions or 'problems'?

[Sean93]

In the years following Jesus's execution, 9 people (including the disciples) wrote a total of 27 books (The New Testament) about him, and NOBODY ever came forward to say something like " Hey that never happened! I was alive in Israel at the time but I never heard of this Jesus!"

In other words Jesus was TOO BIG to be a myth, it'd be like somebody nowadays trying to say Elvis never existed, right Elv?

"Uh-huh"..

There's much more Evidence for Elvis than there is for an obscure fellow in the middle east existing over 2000 years ago. But hey, I've promised myself not to get too much into this stuff, especially with so staunch a believer as yourself, from what I've read in your posts, the bible is your main source of history and proof of these events...so **** that you can't have a decent conversation with people like that.

One thing that bugs me though. You mention that Jesus was too big to be a myth which is fine I don't care of he existed or not, he probably did but even he had his doubters, he was killed for ****s sake by the very people who saw him do all his wizardry, the same thing happens in the OT -The golden calf being created despite the desert wanderers knowing that god exists-. That's one reason I can't believe the bible. People in it see living physical proof of god but yet still run off with others gods...seriously? How does that even make sense? Unless of course that is one of those Choose your own adventure bible moments were you interpret it to suit your needs.

P.s Christianity stole Elvis' holy image.

So what? Jesus had such a massive impact on Israel that he became a household name and the whole country was still buzzing and talking about him for years after his death.

then somebody said "Hey let's write it all down for history!", and that's how the New Testament came to us from - "eyewitnesses and ministers of the word" (Luke 1:2)

Same with Elvis, many of the books about him were written by people who either knew him, or interviewed people who did know him (family, friends, musicians, fans etc)..

They conflict in accuracy I'll have you know.

[Crikey]

Trading spouses is/was a TV show in which two families swap wives or husbands. She swapped with a non-christian family.

I've thrown two people out of my house, one was a so-called "christian" evangelist, and the other was a so-called "christian" Rapturist woman, they were soon out on their butts..

(Oh, and one day my street doorbell went, I was expecting the meter reader so I let him in and began walking down the communal stairwell (I live on the 3rd floor); and called down "Is that the meter man?"

"No" came the reply, "we're Jehovah's Witnesses", so I quietly tiptoed back to my flat and locked the door and they eventually cleared off)

[Crikey]

There's much more Evidence for Elvis than there is for an obscure fellow in the middle east existing over 2000 years ago. But hey, I've promised myself not to get too much into this stuff, especially with so staunch a believer as yourself, from what I've read in your posts, the bible is your main source of history and proof of these events...so **** that you can't have a decent conversation with people like that.

But mate, one of the favourite best-selling books on my bookshelf is "Tank Men" by Robert Kershaw about WW2 tank combat; and although it was written some 60 years after the event, he researched military documents and interviewed veteran tank crewmen to get their eyewitness accounts to give us a "bible" of WW2 armoured warfare, and nobody doubts its accuracy.

Same with the New Testament, it's a set of eyewitness accounts and interviews, so why should we doubt it?

[Frank Merton]

I'm not sure I can believe my eyes here: a comparison of the evidence of the existence of a twentieth century figure to that of a first century figure.

Usually in these discussions someone like the reality of Julius Caesar is brought up, where at least the time frame is relatively close.

[Frank Merton]

A few facts might be in order here. There is not a single mention of Jesus in anything but Christian sources from that period of history, nor for several hundred years later. The earliest mention of Jesus in any of the ancient sources is an interpolation into the text of Josephus, clumsily and fraudulently inserted several centuries later.

Even the Christian sources we have date from at least 50 years after the fact (the earliest MSS date from several hundred years later, so that it is being generous to the Christian apologists).

I'm an Asian, and, of course, familiar with Western culture; I have been sitting here waiting for someone closer to all this than I am, but ran out of patience.

[Sean93]

But mate, one of the favourite best-selling books on my bookshelf is "Tank Men" by Robert Kershaw about WW2 tank combat; and although it was written some 60 years after the event, he researched military documents and interviewed veteran tank crewmen to get their eyewitness accounts to give us a "bible" of WW2 armoured warfare, and nobody doubts its accuracy.

Same with the New Testament, it's a set of eyewitness accounts and interviews, so why should we doubt it?

Because I doubt that book has been through copious amounts for authors and edits and there are still WW2 Vets alive today.

Plus WW2 isn't as important as the entire of fate of mankind. I just the want the truth, I'm not here to prove religions wrong except when they are because I care about the truth and would like to know it although I've saved myself the disappointment of knowing I'll never get it, the full story that is. I sure hope the grader scheme isn't this complicated and head-frying because if so, i believe Bill Hicks when he said god was a prankster and he's probably p***ing himself in laughter while watching me...hey, is that rain?

Still, if it makes ye happy...

[Rlyeh]

Same with Elvis, many of the books about him were written by people who either knew him, or interviewed people who did know him (family, friends, musicians, fans etc)..

Not sure your obsession with Elvis, still Elvis wrote songs, Jesus authored nothing.

[Rlyeh]

I've thrown two people out of my house, one was a so-called "christian" evangelist, and the other was a so-called "christian" Rapturist woman, they were soon out on their butts..

(Oh, and one day my street doorbell went, I was expecting the meter reader so I let him in and began walking down the communal stairwell (I live on the 3rd floor); and called down "Is that the meter man?"

"No" came the reply, "we're Jehovah's Witnesses", so I quietly tiptoed back to my flat and locked the door and they eventually cleared off)

The reason I posted the video was because your accusation of Buddha being a satanist was just as ridiculous as the crazy woman's rant regarding the other family. Edited February 2, 2013 by Rlyeh

[markdohle]

I think both groups are somewhat idiotic at times both arguing over the same concept.

Theists realize that something created everything,

Atheists realize that something created everything.

Once you break it down simply you can just sit back and laugh.

Your pretty smart for a rabbit from wonder land.

Peace

mark

[Crikey]

One thing that bugs me though. You mention that Jesus was too big to be a myth which is fine I don't care of he existed or not, he probably did but even he had his doubters, he was killed for ****s sake by the very people who saw him do all his wizardry..

Even though "the common people heard him gladly" (Mark 12 :37), there were still plenty of people around who

hadn't seen any of his 23 miracles with their own eyes, so they let the snooty priests tell them what to think, but considering the terrific hammerings Jesus used to give them, it's only natural that they'd want to get their own back by badmouthing him and putting the Romans up to crucifying him..

"The prostitutes are entering God's kingdom ahead of you, you think you look good in your fancy robes but inside you're full of filth and corruption!" (Matt 21:32/Matt 23:27)

Edited February 2, 2013 by Crikey

[Crikey]

There is not a single mention of Jesus in anything but Christian sources from that period of history....

Think "politics" mate!

When christianity began snowballing in popularity after Jesus's execution, the snooty Jewish priests and the posturing Romans said - "Oops better not let on it was us who killed him, quick shred all the documents implicating us or we'll have a Jesusgate scandal on our hands!

Let's airbrush him out of history and start hassling christians, and people will soon quickly forget about him"..

Nevertheless 27 books did slip through the net and get published as the New Testament..

[Crikey]

I just the want the truth, I'm not here to prove religions wrong except when they are...

The bottom line is that it's your call whether to believe the Bible or not!

It consists of 66 books listing human close encounters with offworld beings, surely that would interest any open-minded human?

Jesus said -

"I'll tell you things hidden since the creation of the world" (Matt 13:35)

The Atheists Bible by comparison consists of nothing but blank pages ..

[+Paranoid Android]

A few facts might be in order here. There is not a single mention of Jesus in anything but Christian sources from that period of history, nor for several hundred years later. The earliest mention of Jesus in any of the ancient sources is an interpolation into the text of Josephus, clumsily and fraudulently inserted several centuries later.

1- Just because they were written as "Christian sources" does not mean that they are inherently unreliable and therefore the character on whom they are written did not exist. These texts were in circulation only shortly after Jesus, in some cases as early as 10-15 years after Jesus (I'm not referring to the gospels). Surely, if these texts were in circulation and there was no such person as Jesus there would have been someone, somewhere, who would have written exclaiming that no eye-witness of Jesus can be found.

2- You have a point about Josephus' insertion. However, it must also be said that not all scholars believe that the reference to Jesus was entirely inserted. Some believe that it may have existed in some form but simply tweaked to make it more friendly to Christian interpretation (eg, the term "He was the Messiah" may originally have read "he was the so-called Messiah"). Granted, this is not the majority view in historical readership, but the suggestion is there.

3- More on Josephus, even if that quote was entirely fabricated, there is a lesser-known second reference to Jesus. This is very short and simply refers to "James, the brother of Jesus". And in contrast to the other well-known passage, no evidence exists that this was tampered with. And most scholars believe that WAS originally part of the text, though as with the other quote there is some disagreement, and some scholars believe it also to be an interpolation (most don't, but just as it would be wrong to ignore the minority concerning the first quote, so also is it wrong to ignore the minority on this quote).

Even the Christian sources we have date from at least 50 years after the fact (the earliest MSS date from several hundred years later, so that it is being generous to the Christian apologists).

As mentioned above, some of the biblical texts (in particular some of the writings of Paul) can be reliably dated to less than 20 years after Jesus. I think you may be referring to the gospels when you state that they are "at least 50 years after the fact", and even that isn't entirely accurate since the book of Mark is generally accepted to have been written circa 70 AD (approximately 40 years after Jesus' death), though the other three gospels are generally agreed to be later than that (John's gospel, the latest, dating somewhere from 90-120 AD).

Just thought I'd point that out

~ Regards, PA

Edited February 2, 2013 by Paranoid Android

[Frank Merton]

The thing about Paul, and I think you are roughly correct about his dates, is that he knows nothing of the earthly Jesus we see in the Gospels. His Jesus is in Heaven about to return in glory. He has that Jesus died and was resurrected, but no details, and is widely interpreted as thinking of events that took place in a hazy mythical time.

My feeling about ancient sources is that they are about as reliable as the stories they tell; if a historian tells us about wars and politics and so on, he is probably history, but if he tells us about monsters and the doings of heavenly beings and so on, then he is literature. I see no reason why the Gospels should be given a free pass.

[Beckys_Mom]

There's much more Evidence for Elvis than there is for an obscure fellow in the middle east existing over 2000 years ago. But hey, I've promised myself not to get too much into this stuff, especially with so staunch a believer as yourself, from what I've read in your posts, the bible is your main source of history and proof of these events...so **** that you can't have a decent conversation with people like that.

One thing that bugs me though. You mention that Jesus was too big to be a myth which is fine I don't care of he existed or not, he probably did but even he had his doubters, he was killed for ****s sake by the very people who saw him do all his wizardry, the same thing happens in the OT -The golden calf being created despite the desert wanderers knowing that god exists-. That's one reason I can't believe the bible. People in it see living physical proof of god but yet still run off with others gods...seriously? How does that even make sense? Unless of course that is one of those Choose your own adventure bible moments were you interpret it to suit your needs.

P.s Christianity stole Elvis' holy image.

They conflict in accuracy I'll have you know.

I have to let my die hard 7 yr old Elvis fan see this.. lol

[Beckys_Mom]

The bottom line is that it's your call whether to believe the Bible or not!

It consists of 66 books listing human close encounters with offworld beings, surely that would interest any open-minded human?

Jesus said -

"I'll tell you things hidden since the creation of the world" (Matt 13:35)

The Atheists Bible by comparison consists of nothing but blank pages ..

Because they can lead good lives without a manual to tell you how?

[Beckys_Mom]

But what was the story behind the vid, maybe she came home and found it full of druggies, satanists and perverts and was just throwing them out to protect her daughter like any good Christian mom would?

Having seen this woman and can tell she was over reacting ( cuz I saw the show long time ago ) I think she should be the new face of Christianity.. A massive poster of her, eyes popping out with rage flashing those teeth.. With her yelling - ITS SO DARK SIDED Tarot cards and Buddha AAHHH !! Her kids looked spooked.. lol

[Crikey]

Crikey said- "books about Elvis.."

They conflict in accuracy I'll have you know.

Prove it..

[Crikey]

..your accusation of Buddha being a satanist was just as ridiculous..

I never said Buddha went out sacrificing sheep and chickens like satanists do, I simply said most Buddhist teachings are satanic.

For example-

"No one saves us but ourselves. No one can and no one may"-Buddha

"Peace comes from within. Do not seek it without"-Buddha

See, Buddhism teaches us to look within ourselves for happiness and that we don't need Jesus or anybody else.

Ha ha, we humans are far from perfect, so looking within ourselves for the truth is a dead end..

[Rlyeh]

I never said Buddha went out sacrificing sheep and chickens like satanists do, I simply said most Buddhist teachings are satanic.

For example-

"No one saves us but ourselves. No one can and no one may"-Buddha

"Peace comes from within. Do not seek it without"-Buddha

Nothing to do with satan, so like I said, ridiculous.

See, Buddhism teaches us to look within ourselves for happiness and that we don't need Jesus or anybody else.

Ha ha, we humans are far from perfect, so looking within ourselves for the truth is a dead end..

But when imperfect humans start speaking of dead god men, you're sold.

[Crikey]

Crikey said- The Atheists Bible by comparison consists of nothing but blank pages

Because they can lead good lives without a manual to tell you how?

It goes further than that; the Bible is a 'Spiritual Survival Manual' that us how to tap into The Force that fills the universe and get feelgood downloads from it, think of it as a Power Boost..

For example in Bear Grylls Foreign Legion training show, recruits could choose one precious item from their belongings, and he chose his Bible-

[Sean93]

Crikey said- "books about Elvis.."

Prove it..

Well the only way I would be able to do that would be to recommend you some books but by default, we all know that most if not all published literature has inaccuracies and even more so if multiple books are written on the same topic and by different authors. How many science papers for example do you think are now defunct thanks to new findings? The truth can change the consensus.

There is a cult of Elvis you know, with 12 apostles who claims that Elvis rose from the dead and came to them http://www.uncoveror.com/elvites.htm This is literature on Elvis too and cannot be proven wrong despite the fact that it's most likely bull****. The burden of proof can so easily be thrown around like a hot potato.

Edited February 2, 2013 by Sean93

[Crikey]

There is a cult of Elvis you know, with 12 apostles who claims that Elvis rose from the dead and came to them..

You got it mate, he was captured on this google street view shot a couple of years ago rocking outside 'The Caff' in Torquay, England..

[Sean93]

You got it mate, he was captured on this google street view shot a couple of years ago rocking outside 'The Caff' in Torquay, England..

I'm a believer.

[+Paranoid Android]

The thing about Paul, and I think you are roughly correct about his dates, is that he knows nothing of the earthly Jesus we see in the Gospels. His Jesus is in Heaven about to return in glory. He has that Jesus died and was resurrected, but no details, and is widely interpreted as thinking of events that took place in a hazy mythical time.

My feeling about ancient sources is that they are about as reliable as the stories they tell; if a historian tells us about wars and politics and so on, he is probably history, but if he tells us about monsters and the doings of heavenly beings and so on, then he is literature. I see no reason why the Gospels should be given a free pass.

Whether Paul knew about it or not, as soon as his writings hit the scene, if Jesus never existed, someone would have written about it. There would have been controversy. But in all the anti-Christian writing about Jesus in ancient times, and there were several writers who disagreed with Christianity, they argued against Jesus on many areas, but none of them argued against his existence.

I'm not saying the gospels should be taken as historical fact. I'm simply saying that every text has bias. And so when reading the gospels, the Christian bias should be taken into consideration. When reading Josephus the Jewish bias should be taken into consideration. That kind of thing.