originally posted by: amazing
I found these points to be both thought provoking and good for debate. It's a worthwhile read, whether you are a Christian or not.
While I believe in God, I do not personally believe in Christianity and I think this article really puts into words, why I feel that way. I was a
both a Baptist and a Methodist in the past, and have a lot of experience in/with the Church. I put this in the conspiracies in Religions forum
because there are several conspiracies that this article touches on. Most noteworthy among them is the conspiracy to paint the Romans in a Good light
and the paint the Jewish people in a bad light and how Paul hi-jacked Christianity. I never liked that SOB!
I think it would be well worth taking some of these specific points and arguing them here, rather than tackle the article as a whole.
Well, someone's opinion on a blog really counts for something, right?
Let's go through these...
1: The concept of salvation is not new to Christianity, found in other religions. In Egyptian afterlife, your soul is weighed with a feather. In Greek
afterlife, you have to pay the boatman on the River Styx. So even if you do believe, in Christianity you will still be judged for your works.
2: Christianity didn't invent the afterlife or the requirements for reaching one place or the other.
3: Eternal hell was not the creation of the imagination by Christians, in fact it was a part of every religion, including Hinduism.
4: Christianity does no accept that one can live a sinful life and then claim freedom of salvation. That is not a core tenet of salvation, it might be
according to Calvinism, but that's a whole other ball game in itself. Nope, Hitler could not ever go to heaven, he broke the commandment "thou shalt
not kill" and by continuing in it, no...not gonna' make it.
5: Blah, blah, blah.."God is evil, God kills people, God does this, God does that..." If there is no God or one believes in the natural only, then
according to natural laws, God cannot be charged with anything. Survival of the fittest, right? No morality means that God did not break any moral
laws, only want you want to call moral in your worldview. A law is just a law, but according to Clarence Darrow, he claims that the only way one
breaks a law is because it is a law in the first place, remove the law, then no crime was committed.
6: That refers to the curse, not the punishment, we still will have to face God for our works. Jesus redeemed, that means bought us back from the
curse of death. Jesus never said you won't find punishment, He did say that He is the "resurrection and the life". In Him there is life. He that
believes on Jesus will have everlasting life. It's not about punishment, but from the curse of death that reigned from the fall of Adam. You are dead
now where you sit, you are a dying creature, that is fact. There is nothing in yourself or that you can do that will extend your life beyond what you
will live out. But the direct actions of this life have an impact on your spirit, not the other way around.
7: Umm, please read my above answers. What you do belies or upholds what you believe. "There is a way that seems right unto man, but the end of his
ways are death". That means that whatever way you believe and seem right to you, apart from God, it is your ways that are death. What you do has to
reflect what you believe.
8: All religions believe that.
9: Again, found in all religions.
10: Miracles still happen, but people don't want to see that they do. Endless stories out there of miracles.
11: Jesus will come again, the Bible just says "watch and pray" so that you are ready. But with the many people dying daily, have they made
themselves ready for that moment of death?
12: Just because those were written after 33 AD, does not mean they were not accurate as those people lived during that time. We simply don't have
all the documents written, there could have been hundreds written by those authors. The author here is assuming those were the only letters written.
14: Based on the wrong of #13, so null and void.
15: There was no Xerox or fax machine in those days, and it proves they were eyewitnesses. Please, #15 is absurd. If you have a trial today, even the
eyewitnesses won't say everything the same as the others. They only include things they remember.
16: Absurd like #15.
17: Face palming, that's the same absurdity like #15 and #16.
18: "What most likely happened" is an assumption, the author is putting in his own opinion. Moving along.
19: Judas did what was prophesied that he would do. The OT has many references to this.
20: Wrong assumption, Jesus WAS NOT born in Nazareth, He was born in Bethlehem. The fact this author makes the wrong claim now nullifies this
21: It may not have been a Roman custom, but the Romans were well-known to allow their vassal states to enjoy their customs, and it is clear that it
was a Jewish custom of that time, not a Roman. Therefore, another false claim by the author.
22: Please share with us exactly who was at the Nicea Council. Another baseless Constantine conspiracy theory.
23: Blah, blah. Those others were accepted at various times by some of the Jews at the time, not all Jews. (Geesh, why is it that people think they
know how the whole entire population of Jews thought?)
23: Yes, there arose different sects of Judaism and Christianity...so?
24: Huh? That makes no sense, the author is proposing an argument that isn't made by most Christians. Logical fallacy.
25: Uh, no. That is a false claim, the Bible doesn't say that and most people didn't believe it at the time. Logical fallacy again.
26: Geesh, some anti-Jewish pandering going on here? Pro-Palestinian arguments here.
27: The author really needs to study Jewish jurisprudence before making absurd claims.
29: The Jewish Revolt, the Jews were not strong enough.
30: I don't know about yours, but I have prayers answered.
31: Yeah, and all cultures had slaves in the time it was written.
32: Alternative lifestyle means....alternative, to what? Even pedophilia is an alternative lifestyle as well as swingers, those into BDSM and other
really weird things.
33: The two verses quoted in Corinthians was a customary city law of Corinth practiced among the Greeks. Paul does say several times that some things
were his own opinion. You don't have to listen to Paul's opinion. Geesh, the author really needs to research history.
34: Facepalm again. There are not two different accounts, it is the same account, the second giving more detail. And this same story is found all over
the ancient world.
35: So the author is defining what he thinks should be the rules? The author is ignorant of church history.
36: Opinion of the author.
37: Whatever. The author is just stretching here.
38: The rest of the laws are covered in the other 630 laws of Moses.
39: Again, Zeitgeist and its false claims.
40: Is the author for real?
I can't believe I made it through that stupid list. The author is just making his opinion on false claims, contrived misfacts, unfactual information,
no knowledge of history and a revamping of Zeitgeist.