Refuting the Bible: Reality check No. 1

Report Abuse
 

Danny,
I don't think for myself? You obviously don't know me. As for religion influencing my thoughts, I am not nearly as radical as you. You quote atheists like yourself ... Read More 

Danny,
I don't think for myself? You obviously don't know me. As for religion influencing my thoughts, I am not nearly as radical as you. You quote atheists like yourself who have no respect for any religion. I have never once said I disrespected your beliefs. I only challenge you on things that are grossly inaccurate or opinions without facts. Statements like “The New Testament is NOT accurate, it is NOT reliable” are your opinion without fact. Which parts are not accurate? So, any book written over 1000 years ago is 100% accurate. I would submit history books in Russia and the US don’t recount history the same way and I bet the history taught changes as society changes. Using human fragility in maintaining 100% accuracy in all we do lacks acknowledgement in the world in which we ALL live. The post office doesn’t even have a 100% delivery rate. What in this world is 100% complete and accurate when complex beings are involved? Did you for the period for dark ages changed in definition between the 19th Century and now? So, because there are some inconsistencies between books of the bible or some other lame excuse, it is not accurate? Please, then you should quote nothing as nothing is 100% accurate. Even the mathematical term of pie is not 100% perfect; we just get better computers to add more decimals to the accuracies. However, like everything else, we allow for rounding. Also, how is the New Testament supposed to be reliable? Reliable for what?

 

Report Abuse
 

Firstly, to SK.

Modern handwriting analysis have proven that the entire section of the works of Josephus referencing or regarding Christ Jesus of Nazareth, are in fact ... Read More 

Firstly, to SK.

Modern handwriting analysis have proven that the entire section of the works of Josephus referencing or regarding Christ Jesus of Nazareth, are in fact a forgery, as the handwriting does not match up with any of the rest of the texts.

Secondly, to Winston,

Do you really think for yourself? It would seem that your thinking is influenced by your religion, which makes you, in fact, part of the hive mind indeed. The only difference between Catholics, Baptists, Lutherans, and the other over 3,000 sects of christianity is a slight disagreement in the dogmas that allow on into heaven, and the varying degree of corruption and greed amongst each sect's leaders.

The new testament is NOT accurate, it is NOT reliable, and there is no level of corroboration between other non-fictional historical documentation to prove that it is. There's a few coincidental hits, but as I've stated before, I could write a long mythos and include such names as George W. Bush and make vague predictions that some could say have come true in some future time, as a religiously dogmatic text. That doesn't make it accurate or true.

I know quite well the difference between purgatory, hell, hades, and many other "punishment" afterlife, although purgatory is more like the waiting room than anything else. There are over 10,000 different ideas about what happens when we die. For all we know you could come back as a snail in your next life, Winston. We all know this is absurd, and yet it's just as plausible as every other version of an afterlife.

Since someone brought up Occam's Razor a long time ago in this debate, I figure I might as well use it here in this one example because it actually applies in all reality this time. All things being relative, the simplest answers are the right ones, correct? Well, since there are 10,000 religions, each with a differing idea of what happens when we die, the easiest and obviously the correct answer is that they are all wrong, and we simply rot in the ground. We're finite, just like everything in the universe. To believe that we aren't is mere arrogance.

 

Report Abuse
 

I will put Danny comments in quotes. I find his quotes entertaining and show a total lack of intelligent debate. He has declared himself GOD and “knows” what Christians ... Read More 

I will put Danny comments in quotes. I find his quotes entertaining and show a total lack of intelligent debate. He has declared himself GOD and “knows” what Christians are, and how they “ALL” think. I only respond for others to see the lunacy that Danny puts forth. His comedy would be better served on the Comedy channel as a spoof like with Jon Stewart does with the news.
1. “Christians constantly attempt to act like they're individuals, but you're all part of a hive mind, and that's a core part of religion. Everyone thinks alike because they become indoctrinated into a belief system.”
Response 1: Really? So all Christian denominations are the same? I am glad to know I am part of the collective (BORG). So, the Pope speaks for Baptists. I am sure they will be glad to know that. Personally, I have been thinking on my own for quite some time. HA HA
2. “Because if the christians had their way, they'd run the country and burn atheists and every other "heretic" at the stake for not worshiping their non-existent deities.”
Response 2: Are you serious? LOLROF Earth calling Danny. Do I really need to comment on this? See my other comments on the history of the US, Founding Fathers being Deists, etc. Generally, burning atheists is unconstitutional and I don’t think we could get a Constitutional Amendment. See Article Five of the United States Constitution or the Comedy Channel.
3. “By the way, the bible isn't open for interpretation. Not with the way you insist that so much of it is literal, then turn around to say that some of it is open to interpretation.”
Response 3: It’s not? I thought the Old Testament was the history of the Jews people and the victor writes the history. See comment 1 above - All Christians think alike. Last I checked, there are many scholars from different denominations with different interpretations. So, since all Christians think alike and the bible is not open for interpretation and Danny is the Wise Man maybe he can explain to me the difference between Purgatory, Sheol, Hades and Hell? He should know the difference in case he ends up there. If that is to hard, maybe he can explain the Trinity to me. Who exactly is this Holy Ghost fella?
4. "John 3:16 is a nice mask for christianity, but saying that it is christianity in a nutshell is bonkers. Christianity can't be put in a nutshell, as it is, like with any other religion, very dogmatic. There's more to it than just believing in a man who never existed. There's more to it than just believing in a man who never existed."
Man this fun! Jesus never existed? R U sure? So, exactly what more is there since you are the GOD of the interpretation of the bible? Again, not all Christians think the same on this topic. Some even say you can backslide out of heaven. Of course, I am just part of the BORG, the non-thinking ignorant Christian. Well, I have about enough of the comedy for today. I will re-state MY BELIEF. If you truly believe in John 3:16, then everything else is a rounding error. I would rather round up than down.
Good luck in the afterlife Danny.

 

Report Abuse
 

Hello.
I was reading these articles of this religion debate and I really like what Danny had to say. I myslef am not a Atheist nor Christian. But I do like what Danny has ... Read More 

Hello.
I was reading these articles of this religion debate and I really like what Danny had to say. I myslef am not a Atheist nor Christian. But I do like what Danny has to say its much of what I think about reilgion.

This is what I share the same with Danny I simple copy and pasted:

"to Concerned...Faith is for ignorant fools that would rather immerse themselves in a traditional delusion than think for themselves and find the real truths of the universe. There is no greater knowledge or redemption of any kind in accepting authority as truth, instead of truth as authority, which is EXACTLY what you're doing when you join a religion and let faith and dogma run your life."

I just thought I'd give my word :)

 

Report Abuse
 

Rebecca,I must say I like your comments,however, I would like to correct your statement about the Hindu's Budda. The Hindu's believe in 300,000,000 plus gods, but Budda is ... Read More 

Rebecca,I must say I like your comments,however, I would like to correct your statement about the Hindu's Budda. The Hindu's believe in 300,000,000 plus gods, but Budda is not one of them. Gauttama Siddhattha, "The Budda" was a Hindu,but would early in his life denounce Hinduism, because he wanted an answer to why there was so much suffering in the world. He did not believe in a god or gods. His search was for the state of nothingness (Nirvana), which is reached by emptying ones self of all desires. Which in and of itself is a desire,is not? So I guess Budda never really attained Nirvana, which follwers believe he did.

 

Report Abuse
 

Danny,
Sorry to bore you, but yes, in fact it IS true that Christianity is a relationship. I suppose you consider yourself "educated" as you accuse all Christians ... Read More 

Danny,
Sorry to bore you, but yes, in fact it IS true that Christianity is a relationship. I suppose you consider yourself "educated" as you accuse all Christians of not being. If that is true, why do you know not the difference between Christianity and Islam, Hinduism, etc.? Should I believe that you don't know that Christianity is the only faith that has the belief that God's Son came down to earth, humbled himself to the point of being a human, and died for humans so that they could have a personal relationship with Him? But of course you know that Islam's Mohammed did not call himself God and Hindu's Budda did not call himself God either. Christianity is the only one with that claim. By the way, your argument that educated, logical people would not believe or be Christians, is no trouble to counter. All I have to do is show someone who is educated and logical and a Christian. In which century would you like me to begin my list? And I was just at a meeting recently where there were many MD's, MA's, BA's, and even a PHd. All are under that "mass delusion" you mentioned. Could it be possible YOU are the deluded? As I said before, Jesus said His gospel would be foolishness to those who are dying. Many of us were in your boat at one time. But realize, that is a boat with alot of holes in it and it is sinking fast. Get off of it as soon as you can!

 

Report Abuse
 

Mr Taylor, allow me then to take up the argument regarding the writings of Josephus because it is important to show the liberties Danny (and most atheists) take with the ... Read More 

Mr Taylor, allow me then to take up the argument regarding the writings of Josephus because it is important to show the liberties Danny (and most atheists) take with the facts. First, he says the writings of Josephus were proved a forgery over 150 years ago. What he doesn't tell you (because he probably is unaware) is that most MODERN scholars believe that skeptism of 18th century scholars (to which Danny-probably quoting atheist Frank Zindler-refers) was unfounded and the writings ARE authentic and the translations are mostly correct (there are three instances of probable Christian interpolation of which I will describe later).

I'll avoid the excruciating details, but in 1971 Shlomo Pines (Jewish Professor) offered supporting documentation that Testimonium Flavianum in the Antiquity of the Jews (the Josephus document) existance and translation were mostly correct. There are other supporting arguments as well.

What's my point? Josephus provides two separate references that confirm the existence of Jesus Christ. In one he refers to Jesus directly, in another he is talking about James as "the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ."

The dispute is simply about the translation of the text. Interestingly, only the first reference is disputed. Almost all scholars believe that the reference pertaining to James is accurate. That alone debunks Danny's assertion that Josephus was a "forgery."

But let's continue with the first reference because there is no legitimate dispute that it refers to Jesus. All claims of Zindler and 18th century skeptics are debunked by most scholars today. What is disputed are three statements in Testimonium Flavianium regarding Jesus: "if it be lawful to call him a man" "He was Christ" and "appeared alive on the third day..." Most scholars believe that the first and third statements were an interpolation inserted by later Christians. "He was the Christ" is debated as either another interpolation or more likely a mistranslation of "He was believed to be the Christ."

 

Report Abuse
 

For the sake of argument I will grant the non-biblical sources like Josephus as being suspect. But you still don't need them. The New Testament documents are still more ... Read More 

For the sake of argument I will grant the non-biblical sources like Josephus as being suspect. But you still don't need them. The New Testament documents are still more reliable, abundant, and accurate than any other piece of ancient literature--beyond compare. But I want to pose a question to you, sir I if I may.

How can atheists call theists unjust? I will be the first to admit that there have been things done in the name of religion or under the banner of Christianity that have been evil. But these are in stark contrast to the teachings of Jesus; they are the illogical outworking of the Christian worldview. Never judge a belief system by its corruption. We have had some corrupt presidents but that doesn't mean democracy is bad.

The atheists like Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens, are basically crying for justice, calling religion evil and a burden on humanity. Yet, in their worldview which says there is no purpose or meaning to life because we have all evolved as a matter of random chance, there is no value for human life nor is there ultimate purpose. So if human life is invaluable as the non-theistic theory of origins says, then what is justice and injustice? Who's to say what it is? What is the value of a life if we are merely DNA? Atheism has no answers.

In fact, if you follow the logical outworking of atheism, of origins rooted in blind, unitelligent random chance, of survival of the fittest, then you will come to the very face of evil. The holocaust was committed because men believed that human life had no value and thus all who were "weak" should be exterminated. Hitler wanted to create a generation of people which were "devoid of a conscience". "The gas chambers of Auschwitz were the ultimate consequence of the theory that man is nothing but the product of heredity and environment." These words were written by Auschwitz survivor Viktor Frankl. His words sum up my point: while the illogical outworking of Christianity has in some cases been the cause of inhumane actions, if you follow atheism to its logical end, you will arrive at something completely evil. A close look at the lives of Hilter and Stalin reveal this.

You cannot acknowledge evil unless you also acknowledge good. You cannot differentiate between good and evil unless there is an objective moral framework-the rules we are all supposed to (but seldom do) live by. And if there is a transcendent, objective standard of good and evil, there must be a giver of this standard which some call a "moral law." However, that is precisely who Mr. Uribe is trying to argue against by saying that religion is evil. He is, in effect sawing off the very branch on which he stands.

 

Report Abuse
 

Rebecca,

The "Christianity is a relationship not a religion" crock is so far from the truth as well as so stale it's not even funny at this point. Actions speak ... Read More 

Rebecca,

The "Christianity is a relationship not a religion" crock is so far from the truth as well as so stale it's not even funny at this point. Actions speak louder than words. Christians constantly attempt to act like they're individuals, but you're all part of a hive mind, and that's a core part of religion. Everyone thinks alike because they become indoctrinated into a belief system.

Christians are selfless? I think not. If that were true, then Pat Robertson wouldn't have been busted multiple times using charity/donation money to fuel his "operation rescue" jet for private trips to wherever he felt like going.

Christians fight for rights? Then why fight so hard against basic civil rights, like the right for EVERYONE tho marry who they chose, no matter what gender or orientation they are? Why lobby so hard against medical science and other fields of science? Why be so insistent on discriminating against people?

Christianity is a religion, period. It's not a relationship with anyone or anything but a perpetuated mass delusion. Do you honestly think you're any different than Muslims, or Hindus, or anyone of any other faith when it comes to thinking you have some personal attachment/relationship to your deity? If you do you're even more naive than I could ever imagine. However, I have no choice but to assume that that's the case every time I hear that stupid, idiotic, and absurd relationship argument. That's a lie that doesn't fly with logical, educated people.

 

Report Abuse
 

You wrote,"Religion is vile, and while you can never truly get rid of religion, you can, through education, diminish its following until the amount of people left practicing ... Read More 

You wrote,"Religion is vile, and while you can never truly get rid of religion, you can, through education, diminish its following until the amount of people left practicing it aren't even noticed. Remove the hold that religion has on the world, and you remove one of the biggest dividers of the populace."

I agree with you completely. So what does this have to do with Christianity? Yes, Christianity has been marred by divisions and man-made rules and regulations, true, but True Christianity is NOT religion, it is a relationship. When a person gives their life to Christ, they are finally free from the old-way of living. What we have seen through history is some people taking freedom through Christianity and temporarily turning it into slavery. This is the old-way; this is self-serving and not what Jesus died for. Jesus Christ came as a thief to steal back what was stolen from His father-us. We had become slaves to a selfish master-Satan. Religion is part of the old-law. Some of it is not, it is simply man-made though, but it is still selfish. When Jesus died, He took back the keys to death, as the Bible puts it. One of the signs of a true, mature Christian is selflessness. The knowledge that The Holy Spirit is here, on earth, alive and well causes such a sense of faith, you know God will work "it" out whatever the trouble is. He is here to help all of us who believe in Christ. The reason we fight to keep our God-given rights in this country is we want to be able to freely worship our God. This need is hundreds of years old. We want to protect our children from the enemy, which is not flesh and blood, but unseen powers and principalities. We know that although Jesus fulfilled the law, He did not intend to turn us all into 10 commandment breakers. Those commandments bless us. A person who follows them has a better life. We want to have a good, abundant life. I mean, after all Danny, do you obey stop signs? Well, you start cheating on your spouse and what happens? I'm sure you don't think wisdom is a divisor of society!