Christianity




Posted by Fei-on Castor

Here it is, another one of Fei-on's threads about Christianity.

I'd first like to say that I'm not against Jesus or his teachings. I find them to be a good guide for living a happy life.

My beef lies with the organized relgion that is Christianity.

You see, Christianity's primary holy book is the Bible, most notably, the New Testament, which is a compilation of shaky texts written by authors that may/may not have existed, with a lot more bias than Penn and Teller.

For example, even today, a lot of higher ups in various branches of Christianity are disputing the credibilty of several NT epistles. They're not even sure if a few of them were actually written by Paul!

Furthermore, Jesus Christ, or Y'shua Benyosef, as his name actually is said, he was an important man with a huge following. Do you really believe that only 4 accounts of his life were recorded? And if not, then would the other accounts have corroborated the accounts we have in the Bible? Did the four authors of the gospels even know Jesus, or were those 4 of the many, many accounts that were penned after his death by people that didn't know him based on accounts provided by his followers?

Y'shua's followers believed he was an important guy, so they obviously are going to embelish his accomplishments. Several accounts of Y'shua's life that didn't match the four in the NT were destroyed, and others were hidden away so that no one would ever find them.

But we've found a few of them!!

We found the Gospel of Thomas, an actual disciple of Y'shua, who knew him personally and hung out with him everyday.

This gospel describes Y'shua as a frail and flawed human. In one instance, he is arguing with a boy on a rooftop as to whether or not he was G*d. Y'shua pushed the boy off the roof, killing him, went down from the roof, ressurected him, and then said, "See, I told you I was G*d."

Not a very divine G*dly picture we see of the Messiah there.

There are other accounts as well, but I won't get into them now.

And there's another point. The word "Messiah", or "Meshiach", as it's said in Hebrew, is abused. It doesn't mean g*d, the son of G*d, or any kind of divnity. The Messiah was supposed to come and change things up. He was supposed to free them from Rome and return the old Kingdom of Israel. At the time of Y'shua's life, the Jews were a tortured, miserable people. They needed someone to come along and overthrow Rome. When this guy appeared with some revolutionary ideas, they hoped this would be the guy.

You may note that when Y'shua stands before the Council of Pharisees, one asks him, "Are you the Messiah?", and Y'shua simply replies, "It is you who say that I am."

This makes me think that perhaps he never meant to say that he was. Maybe it was a label that the Jews placed on him out of dispair and desire for a leader. Maybe he was saying, "Look guys, I never said I was. That was what you all wanted me to be."

Another interesting point is that of Barabbas, the "murderer". He was imprisoned by whom? Rome, of course, which meant he killed a Roman. My guess is that Barabbas was a revolutionary who was trying to revolt, and was imprisoned as a murderer. When the people gave Y'shua away to die, and asked for Barabbas to be released, it's probably because Barabbas was more likely to be their Messiah, since he actually killed Romans and made an effort. It's not likely that the Jews demanded that Barabbas be released if he was walking around raping and murdering other Jews. And if he were, he probably wouldn't have been in a Roman Prison because the Romans themselves went around raping and murdering Jews.

So maybe all that stuff I just wrote is BS. Maybe. Maybe the New Testament is/was G*d inspired and is the real deal.

But let's consider this. About 300 years after Y'shua died, a group of guys in Rome who knew little about him as a person decided which book would be used to establish a canon of his teachings, and the teachings of his followers, like Saul, who for no reason at all suddenly becomes Paul.

Do you think these guys were doing what "G*d" wanted them to? Or what Caesar wanted them to... Christianity encourages turning the other cheek, not revolting against Caesar. So when Christianity is spread throughout Rome, a wave of pacifism engulfs a lot of people, strengthening Caesar's grip on the people.

Ahh, the Romans. They killed Simon Peter for being a Christian, and now he's revered as being the first pope of the Roman Catholic Chuch!

The Romans didn't stop there! Read Foxe's Book of Martyrs sometime to read how many millions of innocent protestant folk were brutally and inhumanly murdered at the hands of the Roman Catholic Church. One stunning account vividly depicts a 10 year old girl who is arrested, raped, and then rotisseried. Another account is about a "handsome young woman" named Martha Constantine. She was raped, then the soldiers cut off her breasts, and allowed her to simply bleed to death. They fried her breasts up and then served them as a meal.

Also, compare the names of the Roman Catholic Saints to the names of Roman Pagan ***s. It seems to me that they took Roman Paganism, and mixed it with Christianity to form Roman Catholicism. Classy.

But let's disregard that bit. Maybe the New Testament established at that point was G*d inspired and Holy and Perfect.

Then a few hundred years later, a guy named Martin Luther decides that they're not okay, and removes a few more books from the Bible, establishing the canonical Protestant Bible, which is what you'll find a church these days.

So then a few hundred years later, a guy named King James decides that it's high time that Englishmen read the Bible in English. He commisions that translation of the King James Bible, which is still widely used today. But here's an interesting thing. In the New Testament of a KJV Bible, or any subsequen version, you'll find the book of "James", which is named after King James!!! He changed the name from "Ya'kov (Jacob)" to "James" so he could get his dirty fingerprints on Christianity's holy book!

G*d would be pleased, I'd say.

Any of you ever research Gnostic Christianity? It was very prevalent around the middle east shortly after Christ's death. However, it was a more practical down-to-earth Christianity that followed the valuble lessons that Y'shua taught, rather than the stupid hopes of those who followed him. But, Gnostic Christianity didn't thrive because it didn't have the celstial appeal of the dominant sect of Christianity.

Maybe G*d is real the way the Christians belive. I can't say for sure, but if I were G*d, I'd be mighty upset that so many people just assumed that their Bibles were pure and holy. I mean, G*d did give us the gift of reasoning, did he not? And so many Christians choose not to utilize it. It's the most remarkable gift that G*d has given us, and most Christians will never use it at all. They'll just assume that their pastor is credible and that the Bible isn't torn and rewritten by various people...

Y'shua told a parable about a man who was only given one talent. The man was afraid of losing his only talent, so instead of investing and multiplying it, he buried it.

If you Christians are right, that means that G*d created us. And when he did, he gave each and everyone of us a tremendous talent. Don't bury it; invest and multiply it. Don't be afraid to question G*d, or your pastor or anyone else in the church. You have the power to question things, an ability that Bible claims is unique to humans. Use this mighty gift and seek out the truth.




...

Having said that, bring on the criticism!!!!




Posted by Arwon

I don't think it's debatable that there was a lot of politicking and power struggles over early Christianity. I also don't think it's debatable that there was a careful selection by victorious factions in what became canon and thus got perpetuated, what was massively spun and distorted, and what was simply strenuously suppressed and discredited.

The counterargument that's usually made is that these other texts are less numerous and later dated, but surely this actually proves the argument. Some might be the ravings of madmen and fringe cults, but surely not ALL. The fact that there's less records of many of the "apocryphal" texts, far from illustrating their inaccuracy or irrelevance, pretty much directly reflects the fact that people back then tried to make sure these records didn't survive and get perpetuated.

*shrug*




Posted by Fei-on Castor

I agree with you 100%, Arwon.

A Christian would say that G*d had a hand in on the various revisions of the Bible, and claim that it is still "Holy" because of that.

I think that if humans have free-will, G*d couldn't have had a hand in on it because he's not allowed to intervene in the free-will of humans. Obviously, these men weren't voluntarily surrendering their bodies as vessels for the Lord's work, therefore, it's logical to assume that their motives were not "G*d's" motives.




Posted by Bj Blaskowitz

I like the clever way you took stuff that people already knew and rephrased it. BRILLIANT




Posted by Fei-on Castor


Quoting Bj Blaskowitz: I like the clever way you took stuff that people already knew and rephrased it. BRILLIANT

If what I'm saying is common knowledge, then organized Christianity would be on a major decline. I've pointed out several flaws in the traditional dogma of Christianity. You're saying that I've simply rephrased somethings that everyone already knows...

I'm sure that my mother would disagree with almost every word of my post, as would everyone at her church. Not because they wouldn't believe it. Not because they'd think I had faulty information. But because they don't want to believe it. They like believing what they currently believe, it doesn't matter if it's correct or even Holy. It's what they're used to believing and that's good enough for them.

That's what I'm talking about. Burying your talent. I may not think Jesus was G*d, but he certainly was a brilliant and significant man. We don't talk about a guy for thousands of years and do all of these things that have been done for Jesus if he wasn't something special. Jesus was very wise and had some excellent advice for life, in general. But I don't feel that this makes him G*d or the Son of G*d. Mohandas K. Gandhi made some revolutionary statements and led a country to freedom without the use of war, a feat accomplished only by few others. Gandhi was brilliant as well, but no one claims he is any sort of deity.

Jesus made an excellent point in that parable I referenced. These people like the ones at my mom's church refuse to use the talent they have been given. They're presented with guys like me who give them factual information as to the imperfections of the Bible, and rather than considering that I may be right, they simply pass it off as a temptation of the Devil or something. G*d gave them the ability to consider and weigh things out, and they never do.

You've probably heard the term "Barrean", referring to the Barreans. These were a group of people who refused to believe anything that Paul said until they could confirm it with the scriptures and verify that there were no contradictions.

It's interesting to note that these people must've been using the Torah, or Old Testament, because the New Testament hadn't been compiled yet. But despite this, most Christians think that it is okay to break OT laws like no pork, rest on Sabbath and so forth because there's a New Testament, so the Old one has no relevance anymore.

I just get so frustrated because every human being has some potential, even if only a little bit. If we would put our minds to something, we could accomplish extrodinary things. But no, that doesn't matter! There's no reason to accomplish extrordinary things because Jesus is coming back soon to destroy the Earth, so we can just lounge around and wait for him with a smile, not worrying about how much garbage we dump in the ocean, or how many forests we slash and burn, or how much we waste our lives away studying a book that has been mismanaged and tainted several times over the last 2000 years.



Posted by Bj Blaskowitz

there are major flaws in every religion. The difference is finding a way to accept them and process them while still having faith if one is so inclined. I'm pretty sure we'd all be atheist anarchists who'd never leave the house. It's a matter of common sense, faith, and moderating ones zeal. But keep on your crusade against Christianity. It's kinda cute, and frankly, I view it like I view ultra-annoying zealots of conservatism, marxism, liberalism, technology, christianity, judaism, pop culture, gossip, revolution, che ****ing guevarra, Islam, etc etc etc. I'll read em, skim for stuff I don't know already (which there rarely is with people spouting off about such things) and take them with a grain of salt and a spoonful of the realization that it's the work of people with (who knows why) an agenda, the desire to butt into and change the things other people hold sacred, and too much time on their hands while not taking into account they're not really saying anything profound, and it'd be interesting to see them go up against someone with the letters P.h.D after their name.

and for the record, I know more people who think life is pointless simply because they are going to DIE, not because Jesus will come back some day.




Posted by Fei-on Castor

BJ, I totally support that. You're completely right. I could come up with some stupid retort and try to debate what it was that I was saying, but I'd rather just be straightforward and say that we'll agree to disagree.

I know there are those who will never be convinced that what I'm saying is true. I understand that, too. They need to believe the way they do. Without it, they'd have nothing to look forward to. They feel like they don't have the strength or power themselves, so they ask G*d to give it to them. In reality, the strength is coming from within, and they just credit it to G*d, even though it was their own doing. But they feel better believing that some guy is up there and that he's looking out for them, no matter what.

Some people need that. I don't. And I'm trying to help other realize how to find strength from within rather than relying on "G*d". The first step to that is accepting that it's your responsibility and that you can't just ask G*d to do it for you.

The people who are set in their ways won't be swayed by anything I say because, well, they're set in their ways. And that's fine. I just wish they'd be a little more open-minded and realize that Jesus might not come back as soon as they hope.

If people choose to be Christian, that's fine. But you're gonna have to do it based on faith. Don't try to find evidence because it's not there. And don't claim to others that it's definitely and absolutely true because you only believe based on faith, not evidence. Therefore, if it is true, it's the least likely of scenarios. So that blessed assurance is actually self-delusion. You trick yourself into believing this stuff because you want it to be true, so badly.

That's fine with me, though. The world will move on, as it always does. I won't be here by that time, but I'm glad to know that it's coming, either way.




Posted by Aioros


Quoting Fei-on Castor: I know there are those who will never be convinced that what I'm saying is true. I understand that, too. They need to believe the way they do. Without it, they'd have nothing to look forward to. They feel like they don't have the strength or power themselves, so they ask G*d to give it to them. In reality, the strength is coming from within, and they just credit it to G*d, even though it was their own doing. But they feel better believing that some guy is up there and that he's looking out for them, no matter what.

[COLOR="Yellow"]Yup. We as people are not powerless, we're powerful.

I don't have an agenda, and the fact is that pretty much all atheists lack an agenda as well. If you're a religious person and you feel happy that way, G[COLOR="Yellow"]o[/COLOR]d bless, just don't try to impose your religion on me. I don't need to believe in any supernatural being to be happy, and i don't need a book to tell me what i should or shouldn't do. I don't kill because it's morally wrong, not because i was told i shouldn't. Since i'm only going to live once i want to enjoy every second i have with a clear mind. I'm not going to fu[COLOR="Yellow"]c[/COLOR]k up the one life i have by doing drugs or following a religion. I'm happy knowing i live in a real world and that life is as precious as it seems, not just someone's creation. But maybe i'm wrong, and G[COLOR="Yellow"]o[/COLOR]d does exist. If that's the case i'm certainly going to Hell. But if G[COLOR="Yellow"]o[/COLOR]d excludes me from his kingdom of Heaven because i used the free-will he gave me, he can go fu[COLOR="Yellow"]c[/COLOR]k himself.

About the bible. There are way too many conflicting arguments about which stories are included in the bible and which aren' to not realize that this book was written by men and it's not the word of G[COLOR="Yellow"]o[/COLOR]d. It's a book of mythical storytelling that teach people good values. Some stories are about destruction and redemption, others are about living life in a positive manner and others are about killing innocent first-born children just to prove a to prove a point. . .Anyways, i believe the bible was meant to be a compilation of tales that people can use as moral codes. But reading the bible for a moral code is just wrong, in my opinion. Some parts of it advocate murder, bigotry and a bunch of other negative stuff. But if take the events in the bible literally, you're missing the point of the bible.[/COLOR]



Posted by Bebop

Whats the bible's view on eating animals?




Posted by Arwon

Depends if you're Jewish.




Posted by Fei-on Castor


Quoting Arwon: Depends if you're Jewish.

Some would say so. But if you read Leviticus 11, in the Christian Bible, you'll note that even Christians ought to eat the ways Jews do. It's in their Bible too. The Jewish Holy book is the Tanakh, which contains the Torah, and that includes the book of Leviticus. The same one in the Christian Holy Bible.

So all those Christian families who eat a big Christmas ham every December need to read their Bibles more often, or just openly admit their hypocrisy.



Posted by Slade

[quote=Fei-on]Obviously, these men weren't voluntarily surrendering their bodies as vessels for the Lord's work, therefore, it's logical to assume that their motives were not "G*d's" motives.
Some pastors(and other "regular people," too) do pray for the Holy Spirit to speak through them. That's what speaking in tongues is all about. So the people were just regular people who recieved a kind of enlightenment and wrote down the words. They all wanted to, or that's what everyone's told. It makes sense to me. /shrug

That bit about Christains disregarding the Old Testament's covenants about eating and all that:
Jesus himself said that the old ways weren't needed anymore(since he was about to die, fulfill the prophecy, thus forming the new covenant which didn't include those laws). Yeah, that's basically it.

As for the texts that aren't in the Bible right now, I'd love to see them all. I wish they were more readily available, though, as the only extras I've ever gotten my hands on are the two books that are in the Catholic Bible that aren't in the Presbyterian one. I didn't even have time to read those thoroughly.:( I plan on hunting down books sometime that give me those other texts.




Posted by WackoHater2

Way too much for me to even think about reading. Anyway, keep that in mind that I didn't read this. I don't find relegion of any importance. I guess I am very confused on the matter. My family is mainly Protestant. I don't even think about religion though. I think it's a bit stupid to pray to some almighty being that may not even exist.




Posted by Fei-on Castor


Quoting Slade: Some pastors(and other "regular people," too) do pray for the Holy Spirit to speak through them. That's what speaking in tongues is all about. So the people were just regular people who recieved a kind of enlightenment and wrote down the words. They all wanted to, or that's what everyone's told. It makes sense to me. /shrug

I'm not saying that the authors were definitely not divinely inspired to write what they wrote. I'm saying how do we know that this is what they wrote since the New Testament has been hacked up and reformed so many times. And the people doing the editing were certainly not divinely inspired at all. Most of them had political interest. Martin Luther probably didn't have any political interest, but I do wonder what made G*d decide to have this guy remove several books after they had been there for a long, long while.

If G*d were to work through someone, in essence, controlling a human's actions in order to spread His word, that would taking away free-will from the human. If G*d were to simply work through a human that had surrendered his/herself to G*d and be offering their free-will to Him, I doubt that person is a Roman politician. Sure, it's possible that G*d moved everyone who messed with the Bible to do so, but that's a little to gray for me. If G*d has something to say to the world, and He's gonna say it all cloudy like that, it's gonna take a tremendous amount of faith to believe it. And I can't do that. I can't ignore logic and believe something based on faith, even though all sense and reasoning claim that is so likely to be untrue.

[quote]
That bit about Christains disregarding the Old Testament's covenants about eating and all that:
Jesus himself said that the old ways weren't needed anymore(since he was about to die, fulfill the prophecy, thus forming the new covenant which didn't include those laws). Yeah, that's basically it.

Actually, you're thinking of Matthew 5:17-18, where Y'shua (Jesus) says:

"Do not imagine that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets. I have come not to abolish but to complete them. In truth I tell you, till heaven and earth disappear, not one dot, not one little stroke, is to disappear from the Law until all its purpose is achieved."

You really musn't forget that prettymuch ALL of Jesus' early followers were Jews, living in the Jewish land, alongside a Jew called Y'shua. They all kept the Jewish traditions as defined by their law, which Y'shua clearly states you ought to. Christians should still be celebrated Channukah, Rosh Hashanna, Shavuot, Purim, Sukot, and all the other Jewish feasts of Adonai. No where did Y'shua ever say that it was okay to start disregarding these laws. The only thing you didn't have to do anymore was making a sacrifice on an altar. Other than that, everything is still the same as it was before. My bet is that the disregarding didn't come until the Roman Catholics defined their version of Christianity, then murdered anyone who didn't follow it. It's just that they forgot to exclude Matthew 5:17-18 from the New Testament, thus making them look stupid.
[quote]
As for the texts that aren't in the Bible right now, I'd love to see them all. I wish they were more readily available, though, as the only extras I've ever gotten my hands on are the two books that are in the Catholic Bible that aren't in the Presbyterian one. I didn't even have time to read those thoroughly.:( I plan on hunting down books sometime that give me those other texts.

Unless I am grossly misinformed (which is possible), there are far more than two books in the Catholic bible that won't be found a protestant bible. I'm sure you can find some texts online. Look up "Gnostic Christianity". That's the original form of Christianity. That's the one that Y'shua's followers spread throughout the middle east. It eventually was dominated by the more glorious Roman Catholic Christianity, which eventually gave way to the Protestant Movement, which formed almost every other kind of Christianity, after a while.



Posted by Bj Blaskowitz

man I love pork




Posted by Slade


Quoting Fei-on Castor: I'm saying how do we know that this is what they wrote since the New Testament has been hacked up and reformed so many times.
I've seen something on TV(which never lies) about how they compared very early texts with the Bibles in circulation now and they were almost exactly the same. :/

[quote]And I can't do that. I can't ignore logic and believe something based on faith, even though all sense and reasoning claim that is so likely to be untrue.
Right. I really wish I could sometimes, but I find it very difficult.

[quote]Actually, you're thinking of Matthew 5:17-18, where Y'shua (Jesus) says:
I'm not positive that's the exact one, and I'm sure he talks about that subjet some other time... but eh. Since that one's in the Bible anyways, it's just as credible I suppose. And I think you can just call him Yeshua, as most people speaking English do. Sure, Y'shua looks cool, but I've never seen it written in any hymns or books like that. Go ahead though, if you want to.

[quote]Christians should still be celebrated Channukah, Rosh Hashanna, Shavuot, Purim, Sukot, and all the other Jewish feasts of Adonai.
**** that ****

[quote]Unless I am grossly misinformed (which is possible), there are far more than two books in the Catholic bible that won't be found a protestant bible.

I spent some time talking about it with a hardcore Catholic friend of mine. He takes his faith very seriously, and he assured me that there were two books in total in the Catholic Bible that aren't included in the Christian one. I looked through it, too, and only saw those two new ones.