God?

[HalfFrozen]

I can easily prove that the core beliefs of Christianity have stayed the same. I can point to the teaching and writings of first century Christian theologians. They're the same teachings as you find today. Granted there are hundreds of thousands of different flavors of Christianity and all of them disagree on something. At the core though, Christians belief that Jesus came to earth, died for the sins of mankind, was resurrected the third day, ascended into Heaven and will return again one day. Those are the core beliefs of all Christians believe. Those beliefs have no changed. You can point to the writings of both Christian and non-Christian writers down through the centuries to back that up. The writings of contemporaries isn't proof to you that something is true?

I am saying, as a whole, meaning anything and everything in the bible is subject to speculation.


What contemporaries are you talking about exactly?

 

[A.Nonymous]

I am saying, as a whole, meaning anything and everything in the bible is subject to speculation.


What contemporaries are you talking about exactly?

And I'm asking you to prove it. You are stating as a fact that all of these major religions have been re-written. I'm asking you to prove it. I have facts indicating that, no, they have not been re-written and are still just as strong as they've ever been.

As far as contemporaries are we talking first century contemporaries or contemporaries throughout history? Tacitus and Josephus both wrote about Christianity in the first century, but there are others as well.

 

[EarlyMon]

One word: translations.

 

[A.Nonymous]

Many people make this mistake, on both sides of the argument.

There is no evidence that God exists. There is no evidence that God does not exist.

This is important.

I know this wasn't directed at me, but I just want to inject and agree 10000%.

Yes, so the term son of Man is clearly not referring to Satan.

I guess I'm confused as to what your point is. I confess I can be more than a little slow sometimes. Here's the whole passage in question from the NIV (first translation that showed up in Google so I ran with it) Ezekiel 28:12 -19:

The word of the LORD came to me: 12

 

[HalfFrozen]

And I'm asking you to prove it. You are stating as a fact that all of these major religions have been re-written. I'm asking you to prove it. I have facts indicating that, no, they have not been re-written and are still just as strong as they've ever been.

As far as contemporaries are we talking first century contemporaries or contemporaries throughout history? Tacitus and Josephus both wrote about Christianity in the first century, but there are others as well.

I don't have any proof that they are tampered with, just as you don't have any proof that god exists.

Did you not read that I say I am not a 100% sure? No ok then I will say it again... I am not a 100% sure. But! Nor can you be a 100% sure they are the same as the original.

We can talk any contemporaries. How are you sure that what they have wrote is gods word though?

 

[Bob Maxey]

While looking at the bible, why not go into it a tad bit?

What is your take on god's approval of Slavery?

Old Testament:

"When a slave owner strikes a male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies immediately, the owner shall be punished. But if the slave survives a day or two, there is no punishment; for the slave is the owner's property.
(Exod. 21:20-21)"

New Testament:

"Who then is the faithful and wise slave, whom his master has put in charge of his household, to give the other slaves their allowance of food at the proper time? Blessed is that slave whom his master will find at work when he arrives. (Matt. 24:45-46)"

Not sure what God's view of slavery might be. However, if you live and die by the bible, seems you can own slaves.

Bob

 

[A.Nonymous]

I don't have any proof that they are tampered with, just as you don't have any proof that god exists.

How does the existence/non-existence of god have anything to do with your claim that core religious beliefs have been tampered with through the ages?

Did you not read that I say I am not a 100% sure? No ok then I will say it again... I am not a 100% sure. But! Nor can you be a 100% sure they are the same as the original.

Actually I can since we have written documentation of what the original beliefs were/are. At the very least, we have solid documentation going as far back as the first and second century. Is it possible that Christianity mutated and changed between Christ's lifetime and the time we have solid, unquestionable accounts in the first and second century? Sure. However, the core beliefs of Christianity that were taught in the first and second century are the same core beliefs that are still taught today and

We can talk any contemporaries. How are you sure that what they have wrote is gods word though?

Did I ever claim that Tacitus' writings on Christianity were god's word? I don't think anyone claimed that. I merely point out that early Christian writers taught the same core theology you can find taught in any Christian church today on any given Sunday. Divinely inspired? Maybe and maybe not. Consistent over two millennia? Absolutely.

 

[byteware]

While looking at the bible, why not go into it a tad bit?

What is your take on god's approval of Slavery?

Slavery, at the time, was a voluntary institution. People sold themselves into slavery. So, it's not exactly the way you think of slavery USA style.

I guess I'm confused as to what your point is. I confess I can be more than a little slow sometimes. Here's the whole passage in question from the NIV (first translation that showed up in Google so I ran with it) Ezekiel 28:12 -19:




The term "son of man" only appears in the very start of the passage and clearly refers to the prophet. God is basically says, "Hey Ezekiel, go tell the King of Tyre blah blah blah." The King of Tyre is never referred to here as the son of man. The King of Tyre here is thought to be (in some theological circles) an analogy for Satan. It may (and probably does) refer to a literal king as well. As I said before, it's certainly not explicitly clear. Maybe I'm not looking at the same passage or the same version though.

For me personally, it needs to be explicitly clear. You can't come to the conclusion that it's an analogy for Satan, unless you've already decided that Satan was an angel.

Old Testament:

"When a slave owner strikes a male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies immediately, the owner shall be punished. But if the slave survives a day or two, there is no punishment; for the slave is the owner's property.
(Exod. 21:20-21)"

New Testament:

"Who then is the faithful and wise slave, whom his master has put in charge of his household, to give the other slaves their allowance of food at the proper time? Blessed is that slave whom his master will find at work when he arrives. (Matt. 24:45-46)"

Not sure what God's view of slavery might be. However, if you live and die by the bible, seems you can own slaves.

Bob

Interesting that you chose an old testament statement about slave owners, and a new testament command to Christian Slaves.

Remember, while slavery wasn't a glamorous lifestyle, even back then, it was a "voluntary" one. People sold themselves into slavery, and were released after 7 years, per Jewish law.

 

[A.Nonymous]

For me personally, it needs to be explicitly clear. You can't come to the conclusion that it's an analogy for Satan, unless you've already decided that Satan was an angel.

A fair enough conclusion. The passage is certainly up for interpretation. On the surface it seems obvious that it is talking about a human king. It's also a prophetical book so it could have an underlying meaning as well. It's definitely not explicit. No argument there.

 

[HalfFrozen]

How does the existence/non-existence of god have anything to do with your claim that core religious beliefs have been tampered with through the ages?

I am using it to compare our argument to another.

Actually I can since we have written documentation of what the original beliefs were/are. At the very least, we have solid documentation going as far back as the first and second century. Is it possible that Christianity mutated and changed between Christ's lifetime and the time we have solid, unquestionable accounts in the first and second century? Sure. However, the core beliefs of Christianity that were taught in the first and second century are the same core beliefs that are still taught today and

Documentation for proof of religion is quite speculative.

I never really was talking about the core beliefs, I am talking about things to make the religions more 'believable' to the masses.

Did I ever claim that Tacitus' writings on Christianity were god's word? I don't think anyone claimed that. I merely point out that early Christian writers taught the same core theology you can find taught in any Christian church today on any given Sunday. Divinely inspired? Maybe and maybe not. Consistent over two millennia? Absolutely.

I thought you were talking about the people who translated/re-wrote previous Bibles/Gospels.

Consistent? In what ways? Core beliefs? Well I would think people would notice core beliefs being changed. But additions like talking snakes, making Adam out of dust, performing miracles and turning water into wine as well as walking on water. Would inspire people to follow such a miraculous person. That kind of stuff I think has been added to draw people with "ohh and ahh"

Slavery, at the time, was a voluntary institution. People sold themselves into slavery. So, it's not exactly the way you think of slavery USA style.

Slavery is slavery.

 

[A.Nonymous]

Documentation for proof of religion is quite speculative.

I never really was talking about the core beliefs, I am talking about things to make the religions more 'believable' to the masses.

How is it speculative? If you have a first century historian saying that Christians taught XYZ and you have Christians today still teaching the same thing, where is the speculation? And again, I ask for an example of something that any of the major religions have changed to make their religion "more believable to the masses." Again, we have historical documentation of the early teachings of every single one of these religions.

I thought you were talking about the people who translated/re-wrote previous Bibles/Gospels.

Consistent? In what ways? Core beliefs? Well I would think people would notice core beliefs being changed. But additions like talking snakes, making Adam out of dust, performing miracles and turning water into wine as well as walking on water. Would inspire people to follow such a miraculous person. That kind of stuff I think has been added to draw people with "ohh and ahh"

You said earlier, "It wouldn't have so many followers as it does now if they didn't re-write it as many times as they did." That is a statement of fact, not a statement of belief.

 

[HalfFrozen]

How is it speculative? If you have a first century historian saying that Christians taught XYZ and you have Christians today still teaching the same thing, where is the speculation? And again, I ask for an example of something that any of the major religions have changed to make their religion "more believable to the masses." Again, we have historical documentation of the early teachings of every single one of these religions.

No offense, but like you said yourself, it helped shape ALOT of the world. And... you can never be too certain about facts that can jeopardize a multi-billion dollar business of being true. I am just saying...


You said earlier, "It wouldn't have so many followers as it does now if they didn't re-write it as many times as they did." That is a statement of fact, not a statement of belief.

That is my opinion, which is a belief, which is not a fact, you of all people should know that.

 

[A.Nonymous]

No offense, but like you said yourself, it helped shape ALOT of the world. And... you can never be too certain about facts that can jeopardize a multi-billion dollar business of being true. I am just saying...

So now we have a great big huge conspiracy to promote Christianity and it has gone on for 2,000 years? Come on now. A zombie Jew is more believable than that.

 

[HalfFrozen]

So now we have a great big huge conspiracy to promote Christianity and it has gone on for 2,000 years? Come on now. A zombie Jew is more believable than that.

...

Actually no, no it isn't.

 

[A.Nonymous]

Zombie Jew = not believable
Time travelling Christians planting evidence in the 1st century = believable

 

[HalfFrozen]

Zombie Jew = not believable
Time travelling Christians planting evidence in the 1st century = believable

You don't have to travel back in time to alter or replace documentation that exists today.

But, since we are talking about time travel, scientists have said they are able to send messages through time travel.. supposedly... I read about it last week.

 

[A.Nonymous]

You don't have to travel back in time to alter or replace documentation that exists today.

But, since we are talking about time travel, scientists have said they are able to send messages through time travel.. supposedly... I read about it last week.

So now you're saying that several hundred years ago and possibly a thousand or so years ago, there was a conspiracy to alter ancient sources that also anticipated future scientific advancement and somehow managed to forge said documents in a way that no one has discovered since. Or perhaps they have discovered it and are covering it up. Let the conspiracy theories begin.

 

[HalfFrozen]

So now you're saying that several hundred years ago and possibly a thousand or so years ago, there was a conspiracy to alter ancient sources that also anticipated future scientific advancement and somehow managed to forge said documents in a way that no one has discovered since. Or perhaps they have discovered it and are covering it up. Let the conspiracy theories begin.

Not that, exactly, but kind of close..

 

[A.Nonymous]

Not that, exactly, but kind of close..

No offense, but your hatred for religion is blinding you to reason.

 

[HalfFrozen]

No offense, but your hatred for religion is blinding you to reason.

No offense, but your religion kind of breeds hatred.

 

[HalfFrozen]

When you get time, check this site out.

 

[A.Nonymous]

No offense, but your religion kind of breeds hatred.

You're right. I've never met an atheist who was hateful. They all love each other. Oh wait.........

 

[Dark Jedi]

Atheists are not hateful. We just get pegged that way by christians when we wont accept the word of god. THey take it as we hate religion and god. When all we want is to be left alone and not hear Christians trying to convert us to save our soul.

Ever seen a Christian take no for an answer? When they hear no they think they have to try extra hard to try and save your eternal soul.

Ever seen an atheist track down and cast his views to a christian? Heck no as we just want to be left alone. Remember christians always starts the fight as they are the ones that sees it as their duty to force their beliefs on to others and they wont take no for an answer.


SOrry cant believe in a religion that man wrote the bible.

 

[A.Nonymous]

Atheists are not hateful. We just get pegged that way by christians when we wont accept the word of god. THey take it as we hate religion and god. When all we want is to be left alone and not hear Christians trying to convert us to save our soul.

Ever seen a Christian take no for an answer? When they hear no they think they have to try extra hard to try and save your eternal soul.

Ever seen an atheist track down and cast his views to a christian? Heck no as we just want to be left alone. Remember christians always starts the fight as they are the ones that sees it as their duty to force their beliefs on to others and they wont take no for an answer.


SOrry cant believe in a religion that man wrote the bible.

You're right. All atheists are not hateful. Christians are not all hateful. Are there atheists that are hateful. Yes. Are there Christians that are hateful. Yes. But pigeon holing all religions as promoting hatred is just as foolish as pigeon holing all atheists are being haters which is what my point is. There has been a whole hell of a lot of good done in the name of religion. There have been bad things as well. Religion is neither good nor evil and more than anything else is.

 

[HalfFrozen]

You're right. I've never met an atheist who was hateful. They all love each other. Oh wait.........

Don't let my persona be the face of Atheism, I am just an asshole in general, and it shows in my posts. But to date, not ONE war has ever been started out of Atheism.

You're right. All atheists are not hateful. Christians are not all hateful. Are there atheists that are hateful. Yes. Are there Christians that are hateful. Yes. But pigeon holing all religions as promoting hatred is just as foolish as pigeon holing all atheists are being haters which is what my point is.

But it is extremely true, Religion promotes slavery, fascism, hatred towards gays and other races, genocide and also sexism.


There has been a whole hell of a lot of good done in the name of religion.

I dont see much of any good from Religion. What exactly is good from it?

There have been bad things as well.

Let's ignore the danger that can be found in the ashes of 9/11/2001, and the subsequent events in Afghanistan, Iraq, Madrid and London. There are many zealous and misguided Muslims who believe that, through Jihad, they must kill non-Muslims -- Christians and Jews in particular. And there are many Christains who, ignoring Jesus' teachings, wish to retaliate in kind. Let's ignore that.

Let's ignore the ill effects of religion around the world over the last several decades. We have Muslims killing Christians (and vice versa), Jews killing Muslims (and vice versa), Protestants killing Catholics (and vice versa), Shiites killing Sunnis (and vice versa), etc., etc. All of it is completely pointless, because all human gods are imaginary. But let's ignore all of that killing and destruction.

Let's also ignore all of the insanity that religion has brought us through the ages -- the crusades, the witch hunts and all the rest.

Religion is neither good nor evil and more than anything else is.

Its more evil then good, and that is for sure. There is STONE COLD evidence to support the evil side of religion.(stated above.)