The Greatest lie ever told - The Bible

page: 2
19
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 09:44 AM
link   
While the Bible has its faults, you do realize that parts of it were written at different times? Love and peace during prosperity, and unity and oppression during defeat. Are we, as a nation, any different?


As for Jesus, it's simple. Before the Roman Catholic church ever came to power in Rome, there were African and Asian break off heresies forming. These still exist today, unaffected by the European churches. Their stories come directly from Jesus, mixed in with the culture they went to. They were later declared heresies by the Western church a few hundred years later.

These churches wouldn't exist if Jesus didn't. They were establish long before the Romans accepted it.

Example of our, or my faith's, dear friends to the east:

en.wikipedia.org...

Established 52 AD, long before the Roman church.


[edit on 23-9-2007 by Gorman91]




posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 09:47 AM
link   
Good post, i agree completely with you mate. People who are offended by this thread should get over it. Many people who hold religious beliefs try to shove religious propaganda down our throats all the time, so why not have it the other way for once?

Fact is the bible is NOT history, it is written by sources who lived centuries after the events. The bible is not hard evidence for anything, more of a story really. Science provides fact, perhaps that should be given a try?

I should add, that im not saying nothing in the bible is true, but much of it should be taken lightly.

[edit on 23-9-2007 by 7seven]



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 09:56 AM
link   
They have found evidence that the Jews were free and built the pyramids willingly.

The jews designed and built the structures.As free people.

As a construction contractor.Which the Egyptian goverment paid for.

This also donates the fact that there was religious freedom.

And the whole chasing moses as slaves and the red sea is BS.

This was according to discovery channels research.

I will try to dig up some of the material they based this off of in there video.



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 09:57 AM
link   
I do agree tho the bible is in fact a cover story. To something that happened around 1 a.d.

to hide the true age of the earth.


[edit on 23-9-2007 by infamouskiller]



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 10:02 AM
link   
reply to post by infamouskiller
 


what do you base that on? how old are you thinking?



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 10:08 AM
link   
If people wish to believe literally in the Bible, that's their prerogative.

If they belive it's a parable for a righteous life, that's their choice too.

And if i regard it as utter tosh for the gullible, that's my choice.

This World without religion seems like a Utopia to some, including me but it's never going to happen.

Religion of all flavours is too deeply ingrained in the masses to ever be excised fully but it can be excised from the individual.

Everyone has a right to their own opinion and i'd be the first to defend that right.



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 10:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Quantum_Squirrel
 


Those are not the 1st two books of the bible those are what they allowed to be the 1st book.

Emporer Constatine threw out many books before them.



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 10:09 AM
link   
reply to post by onthefence81
 


Squirrel. Read my statements again. All of it.




Lets say there is a piece of land and there are 3 different civilisations. All have equal amounts of land area, equal resources etc. 2 are christian nations and 1 muslim. Who is more likely to to be attacked? Hmmmm let me think!
Wars of the past have been about land, greed etc but and thats a big but most of these wars are directed at another culture.

As a response to this line here read this line again:
"Just religious differences (one of many differences to pick from) are a darn convient excuse to take what you want from your neighbor. That and well if they claim "gawd" mandates it then that makes its ok in their eyes."



So we could say that wars are partly fueled by religious views!

So the Nazi taking to the extreme the practice of Eugenics is science's fault?
That is what your saying if you flip that little coin you are using.

What you are doing is accepting only what they say that fits your agenda. Face it


reply to post by 7seven
 

First you say:


Many people who hold religious beliefs try to shove religious propaganda down our throats all the time, so why not have it the other way for once?

Then you say:


Science provides fact, perhaps that should be given a try?

How is it right to respond to others propaganda by trying to shove your own down their throats?
The scientific method is not all that it is woefully inequiped to deal with matters spiritual if they do exist, it is based in the PHYSICAL (read MATERIAL) is it not?
And nor are all scientists some sort of pure intentioned beings. I really wish you people would stop defying ideas all the while decrying others defication of ideas.

To many don't care anymore about the question that started this BS religious versus science war and live only for the fight. This needs to stop.

When you close your mind to ANY possiblity to will wantonly ignore any evidence to the contrary, its human nature. Not matter how much YOU CLAIM you are open minded.
Case in point you Squirrel. You claim to be open minded yet blast religious types as hateful warmongers. Sounds awfully like those that say "There is no god or soul, etc. And anyone who thinks so is a fool/idiot/primitive/whatever." When anything is FAR from being proven or disproven.



[edit on 23-9-2007 by WraothAscendant]



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 10:11 AM
link   
reply to post by 7seven
 


Well its quite obvious if you look at all writing in history. Not one mentions the time as being 1-900 AD during this there period.Not even ancient vatican writings mention the year at all.

Nothing is written about the Year.

only around 1300-1400 are the writing on what year it is.

The age has been systematically taken out. Of all writings.
Even writings from england do not state the year.

Till around 1300 AD do writings emerge of the year.

They give you a history as king henry the 7th is from the year 1360-1422

But there ar eno writings of what year it was from any of his records.

Odd stuff like this.Makes me sceptical.

Even the Crusades were started or in the height of king henry reign.

One of the bloddiest imperialist ever. massive enslavement of the Scottish lands. Rape the new Idea of princes allowed to rights to deflower all females.on the wedding nite etc. genocide.

But he runs the christian crusades.

And all these writings on these crusades.but not one writing on the year this is happening.

Early Roman year
304 days, amended in 700 BC to 355 days

The year according to Julius Caesar (The Julian calendar)
365 1/4 days


The calender was 365 days in 100 BC.

But no one writes the year till around the 1300's.

And the egyptian calender dates to 4000BC to 6000 BC.

the earliest known date

4236 B.C.E., the founding of the Egyptian calendar

Ancient Egyptian calendar year
365 Days.


en.wikipedia.org...
www.royalty.nu...
webexhibits.org...






[edit on 23-9-2007 by infamouskiller]



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 10:16 AM
link   
reply to post by WraothAscendant
 


I do not go around saying u must believe science, or you will go straight to hell if you don't. Im sick of being told how to live my life by some individuals based on a book that provides no real hard evidence at all.

I was simply offering science as an alternative, hardly spurting my own propaganda, sorry if you feel differently.



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 10:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by made2fade
If people wish to believe literally in the Bible, that's their prerogative.

If they belive it's a parable for a righteous life, that's their choice too.

And if i regard it as utter tosh for the gullible, that's my choice.

This World without religion seems like a Utopia to some, including me but it's never going to happen.

Religion of all flavours is too deeply ingrained in the masses to ever be excised fully but it can be excised from the individual.

Everyone has a right to their own opinion and i'd be the first to defend that right.


Right blame all the worlds evil more or less on one thing. Yea thats a clear world view. Completely attempt to vindicate the humanity that CREATED the damn thing. Right. The individual Nazi's weren't at fault. It was Nazism.



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 10:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by 7seven
reply to post by WraothAscendant
 


I do not go around saying u must believe science, or you will go straight to hell if you don't. Im sick of being told how to live my life by some individuals based on a book that provides no real hard evidence at all.

I was simply offering science as an alternative, hardly spurting my own propaganda, sorry if you feel differently.


You admit you offer it as an alternative, as if someone could not be religious while being scientific.
And as I pointed out that scientific method is woefully incapable of doing much with matters spiritual if there is truth to matters spiritual.

Do you not also state that as the only source of fact?



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 10:31 AM
link   
reply to post by WraothAscendant
 


Well when the general accepted theory in science is that humans evolved from Apes, and the accepted religious belief (christianity) is that we were created by God, coming from Adams rib, i find it hard to see how you could believe in both science and religion?

I agree that you could be religious and believe other aspects of science, but we are not discussing that in this thread. I agree with you that science does not provide any adequate explanation for spiritual matters, however i dont think the bible does either, which is what we are discussing here.

Offering science as an alternative was simply in terms of dealing with creationism/evolution. Nothing else.

[edit on 23-9-2007 by 7seven]



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 10:44 AM
link   
So no one is going to say anything on the Asian and Africa break off heresies that were founded a few hundred years before the Roman one?

And oh yea, the Jews did build Egyptian cities. I'm not sure on the pyramid though. But you can force anyone to do anything upon proper force of will. They were uneducated blubbering fools at the time, and those kind are easily controlled. The fact that Egypt owned slaves to begin with makes id obvious that Jewish slaves were perfectly possible. Weren't they pyramids built around 7000 years ago? 5000 BC was some 1000 or so years before the Jews came there I think, but I suck at Math and dates.

Any who, the thing is, religion can't be stopped. I have a buhhdist quote from some guy in SE Asia that I love:

"You forgot one thing, religion always wins! It is like a flood. If you think plugging the Dam's holes with toothpaste will do anything, live in that fantasy. The water always finds a way. Forget which one IT is, the flood of religion always wins. Look at Russia. The Communists tried for 80 or so years to stop religion, and they got no where, Your Christian God now calls his flock from China, not Europe. And I can already see the revival of religion in Europe. Look at your world, when Europe crumbles, they will find help in God once again. It is funny to see this people think they can stop the flood. They will all drown, as have so many others."



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 10:57 AM
link   
Anyways, you were wrong about the Jesus part. The Roman historian you mention that talked about Jesus a decade later, the works of his that mention Jesus have been proven to be forgeries. The first mentionings of Jesus aren't until 200 years after his death. There are no mentionings of any of the apostles during their lifetimes either. Censored parts of the Bible even show that Jesus, like Muhammed, was a pedophile.

There are errors in the Bible even on the first page in Genesis. Events about the creation of Earth and the Universe are mentioned out of order in ways they never could have happened.

Anyone who seriously believes anything in the Bible because it's in the Bible does not deserve to be reasoned with.

[edit on 9/23/07 by RedDragon]



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 10:59 AM
link   
First, good for you - its good to be realistic and ask questions.

For evangelical Christians, they will say the Bible should be taken literal no matter what.
However Judaism holds that it shouldnt be taken literal, and that the creation story is on 4 levels of understanding...known as P.R.D.S. (wont go into this now, but think of the first level as 'parable' level. - which fits with the Christian Jesus, so I dont know why Christians have such an issue with this...well, actually I do - and I wont go into that now either.)

So, you would think the modern evangelical movement would go for understanding of their 'Word' by studying what the people who had it before them (the Jews). In reality, modern day evangelical Christianity is a modern creation (and no, its not true to Pauls teaching if you would understand some aspects of Judaism a bit better.)

NOW...having said that. I am not implying that the Jews have the truth on their interpretation of the parable of the garden, if you will.

But the point isnt any longer is it true or not...but what is it pointing to?
How does the symbols line up with cosmology in general? With science?
Is that rib really a symbol for 'God' taking a dna strand?

What is God...Im sure you have noticed the inconsistent nature of an all powerful God who seems to be jealous and worried that man will be 'like one of us'.

So good for you...at least you have an open mind on this.

Now on the other hand, to go to try to evangelize the evangelicals and point out their fault will only cause a deeper divide (not saying you did that...)

Every person has the ability to grasp reality from the perspective that they have on life...so the truth is available to all (as the 'good book says'..."he lets the rain fall on the good and the bad")

The only issue could potentially be, if people choose to keep looking - like the blind man touching one part of the elephant and describing what he thinks the whole is and getting it all wrong - well same with religion, they get one part of the puzzle and potentially miss out on the wealth of the journey of finding the rest. ("seek and you will find when you search with all your heart"...not "when you search within the safety of your walls")

So having said that...

Peace

dAlen



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 11:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by WraothAscendant
When you close your mind to ANY possiblity to will wantonly ignore any evidence to the contrary, its human nature. Not matter how much YOU CLAIM you are open minded...
When anything is FAR from being proven or disproven.


I don't believe in the tooth fairy either. I close my mind to the possibility because of the overwhelming lack of evidence. This is a perfectly logical assumption or, as you say, human nature.

In regards to the subject of this thread - the validity of the Bible - I was hoping more of its defenders would provide some sort of argument that is more than a collection of books written over a long period of time, slapped together into one volume by a state-mandated religious council.

Add to this the number of revisions and translations it has been through, the outrageous claims contained within, the inconsistencies, the remarkable similarities with earlier myths, the lack of supporting evidence, and the horrors that have been done in its name.

Though I do theorize that the Bible, like other religious texts, are merely books written by people, I came to this thread with an open mind. It's just going to take more than someone's personal testimony of their relationship with Jesus to discount that theory.

And for what it's worth I do think there are some good things in the Bible as well. But the word of God? It's inerrancy? Not so much.



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 11:02 AM
link   
Anyways, I think you might be interested in a few of my threads here:
Picture of what the Earth looks like according to the Bible: www.belowtopsecret.com...

Religion/ belief in God is largely genetic & spiritual feelings are actually neural:
www.belowtopsecret.com...

Faith: a Release of Insanity That no Rubber Room Can Contain:
www.belowtopsecret.com...

The Ultimate Religious Disproof Compilation Thread (note that this thread is very outdated. I can now completely prove that God doesn't exist in only 3 sentences using recent scientific breakthroughs. I have much, much stronger arguments now):
www.belowtopsecret.com...



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 11:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by 7seven
reply to post by WraothAscendant
 


Well when the general accepted theory in science is that humans evolved from Apes, and the accepted religious belief (christianity) is that we were created by God, coming from Adams rib, i find it hard to see how you could believe in both science and religion?


[edit on 23-9-2007 by 7seven]


It seems to be that some science believe that life on earth started from the sea.
Interesting when you think that the ocean and its life was created before the land animals.

Then the aquatic life evolved to lizards...they learn to fly and then humans came from these...perhaps lizards and not monkeys... ;-)

As for the ribs, check out the post above I wrote...maybe its dna.
The 'gods' were in some genetic lab making humans...not to far fetched, its possible today. - fits in with a board like ATS devoted to alien mysteries too.


Peace

dAlen



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 11:05 AM
link   
I would like to ask the question to anyone who is a strong believer in the bible, what credible evidence about our creation does it provide that science and other religions do not? and have you bothered reading about other beliefs.

In my opinion religion is a tool used by scared indivduals as a means of avoiding/ignoring their eventual fate which is to ceast in existance. Some people can't comprehend/deal with this so their reaction is to believe a bunch of nonsense which makes them feel better about it.





top topics
 
19
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join