It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Proof that Jesus and all Religions are False

page: 9
50
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 10:49 PM
link   
What happened to the OP avatar did he leave ATS?
What happened to his original post?

What is going on here?




posted on May, 24 2009 @ 10:50 PM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


impressme, Very sobering story about your past illness. That is very frightening.

Most people I talk to, who enthusiastically deny all religion usually deny the existence of God as well. Apparently, you're not one of them.


I'm not religious nor do I embrace any religion either. But I do believe in God.

This is a dead horse now.



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 10:53 PM
link   
Ok as usual the attack is on Jesus and christianity. What about the all in "all religions" being false?


I don't get the constant attacks on christianity, thread after thread, day after day.



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 10:57 PM
link   
i guess he saw that that he had posted was incorrect and he didnt do enough research so it is gone now. so people who havent seen the original post are going to be baffled. i suggest we all just stop posting here and go discuss something that has alil bit more evidence behind it and will stimulate our lil ol' thinker



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 11:07 PM
link   
reply to post by TV_Nation
 



One of the more controversial theories -- sometimes called the "copycat thesis" -- suggests that many of the miracles, other life events, and beliefs about the supernatural status of Horus, an ancient Egyptian God, were incorporated into stories about Jesus as recorded in Gospels and other books in the Christian Scriptures (New Testament).


You have COPIED nearly my entire posting on page 6 of this thread for which I provided links. Please edit out my work or give credit.

www.religioustolerance.org...



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 11:08 PM
link   
reply to post by king9072
 


Hi, we must not have met before. For future reference regarding further dialog between us, I would suggest that you calm down and assess what is being said with a rational and critical mind. Just because I called out the OP on a falsehood, doesn't mean I am defending Christianity. Regardless of whether you consider scripture to be fiction or not, that does not negate the need for accuracy in your statements. Two geeks arguing over whether or not Klingons have purple blood or green blood like Vulcans may not be doing anything productive by arguing over fiction, but that doesn't mean the person claiming Klingons have green blood isn't demonstrably wrong.

You have to understand that even if your fiction is of your own creation, once it's published, you are under a certain obligation for internal accuracy. Aurthur C. Clark often received criticism over his Space Odyssey trilogy for inconsistencies between novels. The creation stories of religions both dead and still worshiped are other people's works, so comments made about them or their contents had better be consistent with their actual contents.

I would also point out that this thread is in no way scientific, and claiming that it is merely indicates that you likely hold some serious misconceptions regarding the scientific method and it's purpose.

(Further, calling out errors in his understanding of mythology is still applicable in this case because he was the initial source of the claims. Basically, you can't call me out on arguing fiction in a "scientific" thread, when the OP himself is the one bringing up religious myths in the first place)

Science is about following the facts to their inevitable conclusions. One of the main purposes of the scientific method is the removal of bias, because bias will prevent you from objectively viewing the evidence and it will ultimately slant the conclusions of your research. It seems to me that, thus far, neither you or the OP has shown even a shred of concern for the removal of bias. You, by not actually addressing the content of my argument - opting instead to lob baseless accusations. This tells me that you don't care about the facts, but just assume that anyone who disagrees with the OP is some religious apologist. The OP shows a rampant bias by not actually correcting or responding to my extrapolation on the Prometheus myth. Instead of linking to his source, he suggests I google "PROMETHEUS ON CAUCASUS" - which I did. The first link in my search query to pop up confirmed my assessments on what the Prometheus mythology actually consists of.

Source 1
Source 2
Source 3

Now, Source 2 (sacred-texts.com), does have bulleted link below it leading to what I assume the OP wants me to read. It's basically a series of excerpts from The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors, by Kersey Graves. However, it seems that upon casual inspection that Mr. Graves's is oft-regarded as a poor researcher who stretches the truth and embellishes as a means of fudging the facts to fit his hypothesis. People who do this in any actual field of science will get their sack ripped off in the peer review process and have their credibility ruined. There's a term for this kind of "research". Pseudoscience.

Richard Carrier (an atheist and proponent of the Jesus Myth, arguing against the historicity of an actual Jesus figure) wrote an article debunking Crucified Saviors over on infidels.org, which you can read here. It's well worth it.

I had other points to make, and I had a fairly thorough 2-post reply, but upon trying to reply with it I received an ATS 404 error and assumed the thread had been removed by the staff. I really don't feel like writing it all up again, so I'll end it here with a few caveats.

If you want to discuss WHY you think my first post was merely propaganda, or why you apparently feel the abandonment of the scientific method (or accuracy in your analysis) is acceptable if you're trying to prove a point, then please try to abstain from rash assumptions on character and address the actual content of my post.

Also, I think it would greatly behoove you to look up a basic synopsis of The Fundamentalism Project. Though be warned, the full work is a VERY comprehensive 5-volume encyclopedic series and is more than just a little "light reading". It may clear up some misconceptions you have on the roots of the issue at hand, namely that religion isn't necessarily to blame for the world's ills, but it can invoke a wonderful encouragement and growth atmosphere for fundamentalism. Fundamentalism itself, however, can be found in multiple different aspects of society - be they ideological, political, economic, etc... and they can be no less deadly. I believe it was Daniel Dennet who mentioned that if you could uncouple religion from the taint of fundamentalism, literalism, that religion's danger drops significantly and it can be a wonderful producer of culture.

And do this end I would also suggest you look a bit more into the history and events surrounding the woman I "quote" in my signature. Specifically her beliefs concerning religion, the power struggle she found herself wrapped up between church and state, and the sheer amount of respect and admiration that many in the early Catholic Church held for her. The only reason we even really know she exists is by her correspondence with Synesius of Cyrene, a prominent Bishop and former student of hers. Though she was apparently demonized as a witch and pagan seducer by some within the church, there was a substantial number of good, intelligent, and insightful members of the Church who recognized her accomplishments and virtues and - though their voices were squelched by the fundamentalists - they found ways to alter dogma and artwork to ensure that her memory survived... though in a way which would not arouse the suspicion of those within the Church who would have her erased from history. Look into the blending of St. Cathrine of Alexandria with Hypatia. Unlike the projected Christ/Prometheus correlations - Hypatia and Cathrine are almost mirror images of each other... and it's not coincidence.



[edit on 24-5-2009 by Lasheic]

[edit on 24-5-2009 by Lasheic]



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 11:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
reply to post by TV_Nation
 



One of the more controversial theories -- sometimes called the "copycat thesis" -- suggests that many of the miracles, other life events, and beliefs about the supernatural status of Horus, an ancient Egyptian God, were incorporated into stories about Jesus as recorded in Gospels and other books in the Christian Scriptures (New Testament).


You have COPIED nearly my entire posting on page 6 of this thread for which I provided links. Please edit out my work or give credit.

www.religioustolerance.org...






My bad I meant to site the source. By the way I would not call it your work... Considering you pasted it from that website as well.

[edit on 24-5-2009 by TV_Nation]



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 11:13 PM
link   
reply to post by I_EAT
 


There some very developed minds here and not a safe place to expose "proof" when all you have has been picked from another's pocket...
A word to the OPer, don't take it too hard mate, critizism (pier consideration) is what true science is built on...



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 11:14 PM
link   
reply to post by manbird12000
 



Most people I talk to, who enthusiastically deny all religion usually deny the existence of God as well. Apparently, you're not one of them.


Thank you, I appreciate the kind remarks, I may not believe in the religious aspect of it all, however, I am a firm believer of God.



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 11:20 PM
link   
hi all
first and foremost i do not believe that jesus was a fake, but religion was made up by man for mans purpose. (ok ladies you get abreak on this one).i mean who would invent something that only men were allowed to be the head of
and only men could be priests and fathers and vicars and pastors, man the list goes on. oh and that god was male only ha ha thats a joke oh and even the devil was a man aswell..oh but eve was the one who took the fruit of the forbidden tree?? give me a break will you. she should be thanked for showing humanity that great gift we have called "choice".. and how many women have started wars?? not many. if the natural order of things was for man to be in charge this planet would not have lasted aslong as it has..and take alook around you if you think im nuts..oh and what made jesus "different" (i didnt say better just different) is this..JESUS BELIEVED IN HIMSELF! thats what seperates you from him..the reason he did all that he did was because he came from the belief in himself(for have the faith of but a mustard seed and you shall move mountains) he had FAITH IN HIMSELF..but there are to many out there who say we are not worthy and we are all inherently bad.."born in sin" i mean how could we offend something that is everything its just impossible..oh and to you people who attack gay people please think upon this will you"gay people couldnt move a finger if god didnt want them too" oh yes there have been many before and after jesus who were close to as evolved as he was but not many...infact there hve been some who have been equal to his self belief but not more than equal..



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 11:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Neon Haze
 


Although I agree with your assumption that yes all religions are false or based on a single sun occult (a la Zietgiest), your facts and story about Krishna are incorrect.

Krishna, in the holy hindu texts, is named an avatar of god who descended this planet. It is unclear whether he was concieved through virgin birth. His birth was actually in prison (where his parents were kept by an evil tyrant who was the cousin of Devaki). His father was a king not a carpenter. He lived among the poor in childhood then became king himself.

Perhaps a way to look at these fables of religion is to see them perhaps as stories of past kings/tribal leaders those have been passed on for generations resulting in a millenial game of broken telephone. Now we idolize them and think about the good ol days...



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 11:29 PM
link   
reply to post by 5thElement
 


Neon Haze. Just because he recognizes the historical contradictions of religion and points out many parallels to Christ figures and rejects their interpretations does not make him/her an atheist. I personally don't believe in any of the world's established or organized religions, however, I completely recognize the presence of a higher intelligence and power. And as far as prayer that you offered to say for the OP, I would save it for yourself, because you may actually be the one who finds yourself surprised when you find out God was not what you thought.



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 11:29 PM
link   
Jesus Christ is an historical fact. accounts of him and his ministry by
josephus and others .not just the bible.how else did christianity have its beginings?find one lie in the bible,cant be done.so he must have lived and died the way scripture says.not much of a jump to say that HE must have
believed in what he was doing.(TO DIE SUCH A BRUTAL DEATH FOR US)
that alone wins my trust.as far as religion and him being the son of God?
has there been any others who have done such a thing.you see no normal
man could ever have the guts to do what he as a proven fact did.he must have believed in what he was doing.whether or not u do is of your own accord. as for me my money's on Christ all the way.even if i end up in hell
i will not deny him.so much power and glory in just uttering his name.just please people no matter who you are how you feel if yer reading this all i ask is that u remember this one very bold statement from scripture. on the day of the white throne judgement.EVERY KNEE WILL BOW AND EVERY TOUNGE WILL CONFESS JESUS CHRIST IS LORD!



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 11:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Oolon
 

As a Christian I thought you would understand this, but then most people who claim Christianity do not actually understand what they label themselves. I say this because if you actually read the bible you would have an understanding and would not have written your post. I will write a few lines to hopefully jog your memory.

    God created the physical world and gave it to 1/3 of the angels to keep, no real explanation as to why but the bible does state this. Apparently this includes the earth but there is nothing that says it was only the earth.

    The angles revolt against God, lead by Lucifer. The bible states that Lucifer thought he was better then God, his creator, and he took 1/3 of the angles to try to kick God out of heaven. He apparently lost.

    God cannot destroy the angels because he gave them eternal life, so he beats them up and throws them back to the physical world.

    God then makes man as a physical being so he can destroy them if they fail. It appears to me that we are Gods plan B. I have gotten alot of flak for saying God had a plan B. But it looks to me from the information we have that God needed a plan B. The bible does not support the crazy theory that man has an eternal soul. The bible does state that eternal life is a gift from God and that eternal death is the punishment for failing. Eternal death does not equal dieing over and over in hell, this is not supported in the bible and was invented by the Catholic church.


So God created us as physical beings that he could destroy if we go astray. He doesn't want us to go astray so he has created a way to salvation and forgiveness, but he also gave us free will so we wont be a bunch of robots (just like he apparently gave the angels free will when he created them, only he also gave them eternal life at the beginning hence the need for plan B... us). He then gave us a choice to chose him or death. The bible makes it clear we will all be given this chance which is why there are 3 resurrections. The first is for those that had the chance during their lifetime. The second is for those that didn't get that chance during their lifetime. And the third is for those that rejected him (they will be judged and then put to death).

So the closure is that he gave us free will to chose him or death.

If you were really a Christian and read the bible you would have known all that... and a hell of alot more. It amazes me how much people don't know about what they label themselves.

I can't help but laugh at all the "Christians" actually believe that Christ was born on Dec 25th and 3 wise men cam to see him in the manger? Read the bible from beginning to end and you will see that a true Christian will not celebrate Christmas...



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 11:35 PM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 


Please show me your references and sources when you claim that Jesus is a historical fact.

There is no factual evidence of the existence of Jesus Christ other than accounts provided by the bible. Since the bible has not been proven as fact, it puts into question the credibility of a book that has been revised multiple times. There are hardly any original texts and several books of the bible have been removed or edited to the point where identification of the authors have even been skewed.

Please provide scholarly evidence that validates the existence of Christ.



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 11:39 PM
link   
reply to post by mike73173
 


One piece of evidence is the claim of Tibetan Lama's that Jesus was their "Issa", and that he spent his "lost years" in their land, studying their faith.

There was a document supporting this, supposedly, that was burned by some group (Chinese? Vatican?). But even without this, the oral traditions are compelling enough (to me).



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 11:40 PM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


reply to post by manbird12000
 


I'm sure you both have probably already read his work, but just in case - you may want to look into getting a copy of Thomas Paine's Age of Reason. Wonderful read. I consider it perhaps Paine's most important work, even if not his most influential. It's unfortunate that AoR and Rights of Man are so often overlooked due to the stigma of Atheism which was lobbied at Paine and ruined his legacy. Were it not for the influence of Common Sense and The American Crisis on the American Revolution, he would be utterly forgotten. Paine was rare in that, he actually believed what he wrote and stood behind his convictions. To him, the revolution was an ideological struggle - and his enthusiasm for the coming "revolution against religion" which the American Revolution he felt would inspire was almost palpable. It, unfortunately, never came. Once the revolution ended, America wanted no more of rebellion or overthrowing oppression. Paine traveled to France to take part in their revolution, to support their cause as a celebrity. America wanted to stay so far from revolutionary turmoil that when Paine was sentenced for execution - Washington wouldn't lift a finger or raise his voice in opposition or defense. This lead Paine to suggest that Washington may likely be regarded in the future as one of history's greatest hypocrites.

Anyhow, a quote from AoR which I find closely resembles my own sentiments.



"The Creation speaketh a universal language, independently of human speech or human language, multiplied and various as they may be. It is an ever-existing original, which every man can read. It cannot be forged; it cannot be counterfeited; it cannot be lost; it cannot be altered; it cannot be suppressed. It does not depend upon the will of man whether it shall be published or not; it publishes itself from one end of the earth to the other. It preaches to all nations and to all worlds; and this word of God reveals to man all that is necessary for man to know of God."


While I do believe in god, I feel that we can say nothing about such a being who, for all intents and purposes, does not seem to exist. Science cannot tell you anything about god, but it can falsify the silly claims of men about such a being should they contradict what we know to be true of reality or logic.



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 11:45 PM
link   
Great thread, and I'm a Christian.

But your title is off. This in no way proves that Jesus and religions are false. Otherwise I would not have undergone mystical spiritual enlightenments in the past 5-6 years that when I ask average everyday people abut, they have no clue what I'm talking about.

Edgar Cayce said Jesus is the reincarnation of Adam, Krishna, Enoch, Melchizedek, and a few others. Don't make no difference to me.

This one is fairly simple and actually would be awesome if this was true cause that would mean God made a way to salvation for the Hindu peoples.

Doesn't move me away from Christianity one bit. Sorry to burst your bubble pal.



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 11:56 PM
link   
reply to post by clcreek
 


God cannot destroy the angels because he gave them eternal life, "so he beats them up" and throws them back to the physical world..

please tell me that people people dont fall for this stuff do they??


"I have gotten alot of flak for saying God had a plan B. But it looks to me from the information we have that God needed a plan B"

GOD NEEDED A PLAN B? would this be the all knowing and seeing god by any chance? god doesnt need anything god is not a "needy" "desperate" god..and the problem with humanity is they have made god like them..somebody who can get angry.jelous,vengful,guilty, you name it anything negative ..but can god tell jokes? oh no not according to your mob..

"So the closure is that he gave us free will to chose him or death"
i gotta say mate if your god is an angry grrrr god who will punish me then id rather choose"death" as you put it.. i mean he did give me free will didnt he, and free bieng if i choose freely then i could be punished..thats not "free"

"If you were really a Christian and read the bible you would have known all that"

you mean i would have been told half of the rubbish that you hed been told..you have read the bible from cover to cover and thats the best you can come up with?? no wonder people dont want to read the bible,,cause it makes them feel bad about who they are and telling them they are ot worthy.well let me tell all you humans you are always was is with out end worthy..



posted on May, 25 2009 @ 12:00 AM
link   
reply to post by king9072
 



If I come up with a story today, and tomorrow you come up with the same story, is that not proof that you stole my story, and thus AT BEST, your story is simply a copy of mine, regardless of whether mine is true or not?

I don't need someone to come up and tell me "I was with WTFover when he copied your story" to prove that, that is what you have done. I can simply read your story and see it as a replica of my own, and thus you are a fraud.


Really? Before man created writing, stories and history were only passed down orally. Sometimes, members of the tribe or clan would disperse through the land, taking up residence among others or establishing their own community. The adults would pass down their history to their young. Don't you think the same story was passed down, to different audiences, at different times? They would have many similarities, because the event was witnessed by different story tellers, not because one stole the information from another. So, would you like to retract your ridiculous argument?

In response to your final statement, of the same post:


Enjoy your ignorance, and at the end of your life, when you realize you have spent it in a sheltered, ignorant fashion I hope you hold no regrets.


If you are correct in your belief, the dead 'Christian' won't exist to have any thought about how they have spent their life. Will they? However, if you are wrong, you will be able to realize you were wrong. Won't you feel silly?

I can't help but notice that the first couple of pages of posts consisted of, mostly, civil discussion of the OP. However, your posts are full of insults and name calling. Can you not present your case without such?

[edit on 25-5-2009 by WTFover]



new topics




 
50
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join