Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

New Testament Fairy Tales

page: 16
33
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 10:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by DeadSeraph
 



What makes you so sure the writings in the new testament are the cause of such societal strife?


Because every single matter which could make a difference in the course of this world has a religious nut throwing his/her two bent pennies into the pool. And where does their authority come from?

Yep, the Bible.


So you blame the Faultless document for the nut weilding bent copper?




posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 10:52 PM
link   
reply to post by ALightBreeze
 



I have stated that the outline of Jesus' childhood was fictitious, copied typologically and intentionally from the life of Moses.


So where in the story of Jesus childhood was he placed in a basket of reeds and became Egyptian royalty?
You really should read the Bible then distort it as you wish.



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 10:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by DeadSeraph
 


The history doesn't matter to me, Seraph. I couldn't care less about history. We've proven, again and again and again, that we don't become better. We don't WANT to become better. We just want to be better at being bad. We want impunity, not morality. And by 'we', I mean the human race...or those who control it, at least. Not "Satan", not "Lucifer"...I mean the human beings who control the purse strings, who have their hands in every political, financial, corporate and religious club in the world. The humans who believe it's their right to stand at the top and look down on the rest, giving orders and controlling fates without considering what the people below them want. What the people below them need.

I don't care about history. I care about what we do with it. I care about what we take from it. And right now, all I see is blood and greed. If it isn't blood from the vein, it's blood from the soul. And the greed saps all of our spiritual intellect, until all we care about is those things we can touch with our flesh.

We've forgotten what's inside. We've forgotten what's inside, and we use history to bolster that amnesia. And yes, like it or not, our leaders use religion to bolster that amnesia as well.

That's what I see. That's what I know. And that's what sickens me. What we've lost, and how hard we fight to keep ourselves from finding it again.



Your own pain mirrors my own, SplitInfinity. I feel just as frustrated. I don't have the answers, really. I'm not even going to try to tell you that becoming a Christian will give you all the answers (because it wont, and that would make me a liar). I can only tell you that Christ's message has done good things for my life. Had I listened to what the bible said, rather than not, my life probably wouldn't be the mess it is today. I have always been the rebellious type (even to this day), but I am wise enough now at the young age of 32 to realize my own obstinate nature has done more harm than good.

At the core of my Christian beliefs is a message of peace, good will, and compassion. I often fall short of that (human nature), but I consider it a noble aspiration. In the end, I am not here to preach to you. I am in this thread to defend truth. It's your choice what you believe.



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 10:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cancerwarrior
Mormonism and Christianity are two different religions. So I would say no, they are not the same. However Catholicism and Lutheranism are two different denominations of the same religion, so fundamentally yes, Presbyterians, Methodists, Lutherans, Catholics are all fundamentally the same. Minor differences in doctrine do not make it a different religion, just a different way of practicing it.

Mormons consider themselves Christians, just like other Protestants.
While you are correct about most of the mainline Protestant religions being very similar, they all are quite different compared to Catholicism.


Originally posted by Cancerwarrior
believe he was absolutely a prophet sent by God. The Holy Trinity has never resonated or made much sense to me. I suppose my beliefs about Christ fall more along the lines of Islam than Christianity.

See, I never had much issue with this, even though many Christians also seem to. Christ is the Word of God, and The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God. Same thing applies to us humans in a sense, as we are created in the image of God.


Originally posted by Cancerwarrior
Of course I've done wrong in my life. I am by no means a perfect person. But I don't believe that "sin" has done this to me.

Sin doesn't really “do” anything. Its simply being in a less perfect state then God, or going against the wishes of God. Without grace, then all are sinful regardless of anyone's belief in original sin.


Originally posted by Cancerwarrior
I don't think God wants or expects us to never make mistakes, but I do believe he wants us to accept the consequences of our actions.

Of course he does, that's why he sent Christ. All anyone has to do is accept what Christ did, and repent their sins. I fail to see why this is such a big deal for folks, outside their own egos?

I always get a good laugh when I read someone trying to claim Christianity to be a religion of control, because outside the the RCC's attempt at claiming salvation through works, (true) Christianity grants the complete opposite of any control. It sets you completely free.

The only people who seem to have a problem with this are those who wish to continue to do things that are immoral, and don't like to be told what they are doing is in anyway wrong... Or those who don't like to feel that anyone but themselves has any control over their life. Both of these minds sets are unfortunately not facing reality. Regardless of religion, there will always be things that are immoral, even if socially, and NO ONE really has any control over their life (as a cancer survivor you should know this better then anyone). To believe otherwise is to live under a delusion.


Originally posted by Cancerwarrior
Should we not be an example of goodness for others not for Religions sake, but just for decency and goodness sake? I want to be a good example for my family, my nephews and sisters, my friends who are angry at the world. Not because I want them to go to church, but because I want to see them happier and do better in life. Why can't that be enough? I think everyone needs to find their own spiritual beliefs themselves, but that takes alot of work and self-reflection and looking at the cold hard reality of your own human nature. Its much easier to go to a church and have others define your spirituality for you.

People can be good people and still not be saved, this is even talked about in the Bible itself. Just because someone is not religious does not make them a bad person by default, and no Christian should believe that way.


Originally posted by Cancerwarrior
Last Easter I went the Lutheran church that I grew up at, mainly to make my Mom happy, but also to let everyone up there know that I was OK because I was very sick last year. I was the first time I had set foot in a church in over 10 years. Of course I was met with alot of, "Glad to see you're still alive and the cancer is gone!" But I was also greeted with alot of, "I haven't seen you around here in a while." They might as well have said, "I'm better than you because I go to church every Sunday."

I think you might have been misreading this, simply because it's most likely what I would have said myself. Believe me, I certainly do not have perfect church attendance (especially working the night shift), and I don't believe myself superior to anyone.

Its more likely because they hadn't seen you in a while, and didn't know what to say. Perhaps they didn't exactly recall who you were. Maybe they were unaware of you being sick. They might have also been uncomfortable mentioning your sickness for a variety of reasons, felt it was none of their business, or even felt that mentioning it would have made you upset.

IMHO, I wouldn't read so much into that...

Anyway, I enjoy discussing this with you, and for that matter, with anyone who wishes to have polite discussions on any religious topic. I don't take you for being a hater or anything, though I don't agree with everything you're stating. I always enjoy discussing religion with people, even those who I disagree with. I cannot say the same for certain other topics.


However, for tonight, I'm done. I'm getting slammed here at work, and we are having one heck of a storm outside. So you have a good night.

edit on 9/6/2012 by defcon5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 11:01 PM
link   
During the time that Josephus was writing War of the Jews and Jewish Antiquities, the Flavian family was clearly involved with Christianity. This is proof that Josephus, both a historian and a theologian, and a great writer of faery tales,
would have been familiar with the religion and its symbols.

In fact, the total overlap of individuals and events in the New Testament and the works of Josephus indicates that he must have known a great deal about Christianity.

You see, it helps when your adopted Father (Vespasian) and step-brothers create religions you can lampoon at will.

Heck, that's better than a vacation!




posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 11:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by ALightBreeze
During the time that Josephus was writing War of the Jews and Jewish Antiquities, the Flavian family was clearly involved with Christianity. This is proof that Josephus, both a historian and a theologian, and a great writer of faery tales,
would have been familiar with the religion and its symbols.

In fact, the total overlap of individuals and events in the New Testament and the works of Josephus indicates that he must have known a great deal about Christianity.

You see, it helps when your adopted Father (Vespasian) and step-brothers create religions you can lampoon at will.

Heck, that's better than a vacation!





I would really appreciate it if you'd address the rebuttals that have been presented to "your" theory.

You will find them on page 13 and 14 of this thread.
edit on 6-9-2012 by DeadSeraph because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 11:18 PM
link   
Virgin birth.

Yes, you heard me, virgin birth.


I can see it now.

Jesus: Mom, I have this insatiable urge to find me a grrl and...
Mary: Ask your Dad.

Jesus: "Dad, I have this insatiable urge to find me a grrl and...
Joseph: Tell me about it.


There is a parallel between the Virgin Mary and the eunuch Bagoas is the beginning of parallel sequences of events in the New Testament and War of the Jews. The authors switch a eunuch for a virgin to create a parallel "miraculous birth."

The story of Bagoas reveals the mindset of the Flavian authors of the New Testament in that it shows the contempt they had for those who believed in fables about virgin births. Wouldn't they be fun at parties these days?

What is interesting about the parallel above is that both stories plainly use the same historical context, an incident in which Herod seeks to kill an infant who threatens his power. Thus, as a spoof of the New Testament, the passage in Josephus is completely transparent because it uses the same "historical" context as the New Testament.

Another interesting point is that this lampoon would indicate that the authors of the New Testament were indeed trying to create the impression that Mary was a "virgin," that is, someone incapable of giving birth, a matter of some contention among scholars. Wonder why. rofl

Seriously, you can't make this sh$ up. Oh, wait a minute, the Flavian authors did exactly that!



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 11:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by ALightBreeze
Virgin birth.

Yes, you heard me, virgin birth.


I can see it now.

Jesus: Mom, I have this insatiable urge to find me a grrl and...
Mary: Ask your Dad.

Jesus: "Dad, I have this insatiable urge to find me a grrl and...
Joseph: Tell me about it.


There is a parallel between the Virgin Mary and the eunuch Bagoas is the beginning of parallel sequences of events in the New Testament and War of the Jews. The authors switch a eunuch for a virgin to create a parallel "miraculous birth."

The story of Bagoas reveals the mindset of the Flavian authors of the New Testament in that it shows the contempt they had for those who believed in fables about virgin births. Wouldn't they be fun at parties these days?

What is interesting about the parallel above is that both stories plainly use the same historical context, an incident in which Herod seeks to kill an infant who threatens his power. Thus, as a spoof of the New Testament, the passage in Josephus is completely transparent because it uses the same "historical" context as the New Testament.

Another interesting point is that this lampoon would indicate that the authors of the New Testament were indeed trying to create the impression that Mary was a "virgin," that is, someone incapable of giving birth, a matter of some contention among scholars. Wonder why. rofl

Seriously, you can't make this sh$ up. Oh, wait a minute, the Flavian authors did exactly that!


Thanks for that well thought out and sound counter argument. You know where to find me when you feel like being intellectually honest. It's painfully obvious to anyone with half a brain that your theory is nothing more than a faith you cling to (ironically) in some twisted self projection of your own desire to deny the historicity of Jesus of Nazareth.

Hell, you don't even REQUIRE a conspiracy theory. You can, with logic, simply say that "nobody wrote about Jesus of Nazareth until after he died". It's a feasible argument. Hell, you could even claim Paul authored the myth of Christ with more accuracy than the tripe you have presented here.

But no. You continue to derail this thread and fill it with utter crap, and refuse every single civil opportunity presented to you to authenticate your claims. You have been called out as a fraud, and a fraud you will remain until you choose to address the points which have been raised against you. No modern historian worth his salt would even touch this garbage with a 10 foot pole.

For the record, Joseph Atwill is a BUSINESSMAN and a "researcher". He hasn't Got an ounce of credibility, and after your obvious attempts to dodge serious discussion, neither do you.



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 11:30 PM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 



Mormons consider themselves Christians, just like other Protestants.


But Christians do not consider Mormons to be Christians at all. As a Lutheran I'm sure you've heard in Sunday school that Christians consider Mormonism a cult. I'm not sure if the Missouri Synod or the Wisconsin Synod are the same on this matter, but I know the Missouri Synod Lutherans feel this way.


See, I never had much issue with this, even though many Christians also seem to. Christ is the Word of God, and The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God.


If God is God, and the Holy spirit is God, why seperate them? Are you seperated from your spirit? Or is your spirit as much a part of you as your heart or brain? Why say that they are seperate, yet the same thing? Its unnecessarily confusing. At least to me it is.


People can be good people and still not be saved, this is even talked about in the Bible itself. Just because someone is not religious does not make them a bad person by default, and no Christian should believe that way.


The God that I've come to know would not turn away anyone who loves him, wants to be with him and keeps trying to be better.


Its more likely because they hadn't seen you in a while, and didn't know what to say. Perhaps they didn't exactly recall who you were. Maybe they were unaware of you being sick. They might have also been uncomfortable mentioning your sickness for a variety of reasons, felt it was none of their business, or even felt that mentioning it would have made you upset.


Ha! no, they knew exactly who I was, I went to church there from the time I was 5 to about 21 or so. Most everyone that went there when I was a kid still goes there.And they definately knew I was sick, my Mom had me on the prayer list there for several months while I was healing up. There were only about 3 people who said that to me, and I could tell by their tone it was meant to be condescending on purpose. Many people came up to me and said, "the power of prayer worked!" which I did have alot of people praying for me. Including myself. But I also thought that was a bit asanine because there is a whole 9th floor at M.D. Anderson in Houston full of people that were just as sick and close to death as I was. I'm sure all those people and their families were praying just as hard for a miracle but for some reason my prayers went answered while many peoples did not. I honestly think a big part of why it worked so well was because I never thought for a second that it would not. I had faith in God I would be healed. Will to live is more important than any medicine any Doctor can ever give you. Only 5-8 percent of people taking the IL-2 treatment for stage 4 metastatic melanoma have the response that I did. And only 2-3 percent of people with tumors in their sinus cavities(as well as tumors in both lungs, my brain, abdomen, all over really) like I had actually have the response to the treatments like I did. And I fell in that narrow margin. I am N.E.D. now (no evidence of disease). The treatments really did a number on me though and now I have the body of an old man and everything hurts, but I'm still alive. I've survived two wars, several years of drug and alcohol abuse, now Cancer. God has to have me here for a good reason, I've survived too many things that should have killed me.

And I don't agree with everything you're saying either my friend
but I always enjoy a good conversation. Too many times it devolves to mud slinging. Especially on the topic of religion. You have a good night too defcon, don't let em work you too hard, God bless.
edit on 6-9-2012 by Cancerwarrior because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 11:37 PM
link   
reply to post by ALightBreeze
 


Breeze, are you reading any of the posts being directed to you? Or are you that busy copy pasting all this total nonsense that is adding absolutely nothing constructive to this thread?



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 11:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Cancerwarrior
 

I am a veteran of Usenet when Usenet was raw and violent yet I never can remember one poster yanking the chain of so many so often and so hilariously.

Really.




posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 11:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by ALightBreeze
Virgin birth.

Yes, you heard me, virgin birth.


I can see it now.

Jesus: Mom, I have this insatiable urge to find me a grrl and...
Mary: Ask your Dad.

Jesus: "Dad, I have this insatiable urge to find me a grrl and...
Joseph: Tell me about it.


There is a parallel between the Virgin Mary and the eunuch Bagoas is the beginning of parallel sequences of events in the New Testament and War of the Jews. The authors switch a eunuch for a virgin to create a parallel "miraculous birth."

The story of Bagoas reveals the mindset of the Flavian authors of the New Testament in that it shows the contempt they had for those who believed in fables about virgin births. Wouldn't they be fun at parties these days?

What is interesting about the parallel above is that both stories plainly use the same historical context, an incident in which Herod seeks to kill an infant who threatens his power. Thus, as a spoof of the New Testament, the passage in Josephus is completely transparent because it uses the same "historical" context as the New Testament.

Another interesting point is that this lampoon would indicate that the authors of the New Testament were indeed trying to create the impression that Mary was a "virgin," that is, someone incapable of giving birth, a matter of some contention among scholars. Wonder why. rofl

Seriously, you can't make this sh$ up. Oh, wait a minute, the Flavian authors did exactly that!


ROTFLMAO!

Note to self: Never, ever drink while reading your posts. New keyboards are expwensive.


Not to mention monitors.



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 11:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by CoIntelPro

Originally posted by ALightBreeze
Virgin birth.

Yes, you heard me, virgin birth.


I can see it now.

Jesus: Mom, I have this insatiable urge to find me a grrl and...
Mary: Ask your Dad.

Jesus: "Dad, I have this insatiable urge to find me a grrl and...
Joseph: Tell me about it.


There is a parallel between the Virgin Mary and the eunuch Bagoas is the beginning of parallel sequences of events in the New Testament and War of the Jews. The authors switch a eunuch for a virgin to create a parallel "miraculous birth."

The story of Bagoas reveals the mindset of the Flavian authors of the New Testament in that it shows the contempt they had for those who believed in fables about virgin births. Wouldn't they be fun at parties these days?

What is interesting about the parallel above is that both stories plainly use the same historical context, an incident in which Herod seeks to kill an infant who threatens his power. Thus, as a spoof of the New Testament, the passage in Josephus is completely transparent because it uses the same "historical" context as the New Testament.

Another interesting point is that this lampoon would indicate that the authors of the New Testament were indeed trying to create the impression that Mary was a "virgin," that is, someone incapable of giving birth, a matter of some contention among scholars. Wonder why. rofl

Seriously, you can't make this sh$ up. Oh, wait a minute, the Flavian authors did exactly that!


ROTFLMAO!

Note to self: Never, ever drink while reading your posts. New keyboards are expwensive.


Not to mention monitors.


Is that you, Atwill?

Curious last name, that.



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 11:52 PM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 





The phrase 'God will provide for you', is he providing the basic necessities as in Manna falling form the sky, or does it mean that God will provide through others? I live with a bunch of aging veterans that go throughout the city - to the Salvation Army, a veteran food pantry, the senior citizen center, and some churches - to get what they can't afford to buy. Is this what is meant by don't worry about these things? If so, then I can't argue with it. Was there this much charity back in the days of Jesus?


It seem that at least Jesus thought charity was important. He ordered his apostles to feed the widows and orphans, to the point that, after his departure, their whole ministry revolved around getting enough money to feed all those people.

Remember the story about the couple who sold everything they had to give to the poor, like Jesus taught? First the husband came to Peter, to give all the money he got from selling his stuff. Peter asked him if it was all his money, really. The guy lied, and had kept a stash, just in case. According to the story, he dropped dead right there, for lying I guess. Then the same go around with his wife, and she drops dead for not giving it all.
Yeah, that probably happened! It definitely isn't coercion!


Then there's the Philippians. The church Deadons were tasked with serving the widows their meals and complained to Paul that it was diminutive work, they should be out preaching and stuff, and that women should be doing it.

So, Paul approved women as Deacons, to serve widows food. But they still had to keep their mouths shut.
edit on 6-9-2012 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 11:54 PM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 




In another thread it was suggested that I read the New Testament. Admittedly, it's been years since I've done this, but I used to read it often. Like the religious today, I allowed my eyes to glaze over the utterly ridiculous parts. I don't do that anymore.

God I have heard this schtik a 1000 times. Why is it the last refuge of the hilariously faithful to say "you need to read the bible" when I have read it back to back to back dozens of times?

oh well.



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 11:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Cancerwarrior
 


I can't do PMs or whatever there are called here so you are the Yankee not the Yankor.



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 11:58 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 




So, Paul approved women as Deacons, to serve widows food. But they still had to keep their mouths shut.

There's a kichen joke in ther somewhere.



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 11:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by CoIntelPro
reply to post by jiggerj
 




In another thread it was suggested that I read the New Testament. Admittedly, it's been years since I've done this, but I used to read it often. Like the religious today, I allowed my eyes to glaze over the utterly ridiculous parts. I don't do that anymore.

God I have heard this schtik a 1000 times. Why is it the last refuge of the hilariously faithful to say "you need to read the bible" when I have read it back to back to back dozens of times?

oh well.


The suggestion was made when the OP referenced Old Testament scripture as justification for the immorality of the bible. I made that suggestion. While I can deal with the fact you find my "faith" hilarious, I also find it interesting how your first post was in this thread. Breeze started a new account during the course of this thread (after posting numerous times), and then posted again. You two wouldn't happen to know each other, would you?

Sad that people have to troll the # out of others spiritual beliefs in this day and age. But whatever. To each their own



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 12:03 AM
link   
Only Those Who Are Led By The Holy Spirit, Can Fully Understand Scripture...

Tested...And Proven...

Text - Context - Numeric Structure - Prophecy...


"The works of Ivan Panin have been put before the experts many times. Panin once challenged nine noted rationalists and Bible critics through the medium of the New York Sun newspaper November 9, 1899. He dared them to publicly refute or give explanation for a few of his presented facts. Four made lame excuses. The rest were silent.

Panin issued a challenge throughout leading newspapers of the world asking for a natural explanation or rebuttal of the facts. Not a single person accepted." www.biblebelievers.org.au...

Numeric Structure... www.theomatics.com...

Prophecy Fulfilled... www.reasons.org...


More evidence of divine origin of the New Testament and the signature of 373


edit on 7-9-2012 by ResearchEverything777 because: add number



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 12:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by DeadSeraph

Originally posted by CoIntelPro
reply to post by jiggerj
 




In another thread it was suggested that I read the New Testament. Admittedly, it's been years since I've done this, but I used to read it often. Like the religious today, I allowed my eyes to glaze over the utterly ridiculous parts. I don't do that anymore.

God I have heard this schtik a 1000 times. Why is it the last refuge of the hilariously faithful to say "you need to read the bible" when I have read it back to back to back dozens of times?

oh well.


The suggestion was made when the OP referenced Old Testament scripture as justification for the immorality of the bible. I made that suggestion. While I can deal with the fact you find my "faith" hilarious, I also find it interesting how your first post was in this thread. Breeze started a new account during the course of this thread (after posting numerous times), and then posted again. You two wouldn't happen to know each other, would you?

Sad that people have to troll the # out of others spiritual beliefs in this day and age. But whatever. To each their own



Bro, there's no point in getting wrapped up in trying to set these people straight. It's made to be that way. Anything pro jesus is to be ridiculed by the people who don't understand the faith. They have to extend their hand and give thanks for their existence, and until that moment, they will not see.
It's sad but I don't blame them, as without a personal relationship with god, christianity will seem hollow.
Do you see his works in the world? You're a believer right?





new topics

top topics



 
33
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join