The Atheism Thread - Part 7

Status
Not open for further replies.
The thing I never get is the protestant religions wanted to break away from the Catholic church, yet they keep the bible they created int he 4th century. You think if somebody believed that that something is not quite right with the Catholic religion they might dispute some of the books they added the the New Testament and some they kept out.

Also why is the Book of Enoch not in the bible? It's referenced many times in the New Testament, it also has face to face interaction with God, which is much more valid then many stories in the OT that have absolutely nothing to do with god(I am looking at you book of Esther)

Not all protestants wanted to keep the bible as it was. Martin Luther tore out a number of books. He hated Hebrews and he moved all the gospels to the back of his bible. The only Gospel he had any real respect for was Mark if im not mistaken. He had problems with James as well. He had issues in the OT too. Why any denomination does anything is complicated tho. Youd need to read a number of books and really dig into it to get a good answer.
 
Both the Geneva bible and the KJV are quite different from the Vulgate, to be fair. I can't speak for the other vernacular translations, because I know nothing about them, but attempts were generally made to translate the original texts (or earlier Greek translations) afresh rather than to rely on the Latin.

As for the inclusion of the apocrypha: I really don't know. I keep trying to ask our Christian friends about this, but they don't bite.
 
He hated Hebrews
You're not kidding!

Martin Luther - “If I had to baptize a Jew, I would take him to the bridge of the Elbe, hang a stone around his neck and push him over with the words, ‘I baptize thee in the name of Abraham.’”
- “They are real liars and bloodhounds who. . . continually perverted and falsified all of Scripture. . .”
- “The sun has never shone on a more bloodthirsty and vengeful people. . .”
- “The worse a Jew is, the more arrogant he is, solely because he is a Jew.”
- “Be on your guard against the Jews, knowing that wherever they have their synagogues, nothing is found but a den of devils. . . Where you see or hear a Jew teaching, remember that you are hearing nothing but a venomous basilisk who poisons and kills people merrily by fasten. . .”
-“The devil with all his angels has taken possession of this people. . .”
“Whenever you see a genuine Jew, you may with a good conscience cross yourself and bluntly say, ‘There goes a devil incarnate.’”
-“In their synagogues and in their prayers they wish us every misfortune. They rob us of our money and goods through their usury, and they play on us every wicked trick they can. . . no one acts thus, except the devil himself, or whomever he possesses, as he has possessed the Jews.”
-“They are a heavy burden, a plague, a pestilence, a sheer misfortune for our country.”
-“Set fire to their synagogues or schools and . . . bury and cover with dirt whatever will not burn, so that no man will ever again see a stone or cinder of them. This is to be done in honor of our Lord and of Christendom, so that God might see that we are Christians, and do not condone or knowingly tolerate such public lying, cursing or blaspheming of his Son and of his Christians.”
-“. . . Eject them forever from the country. . . gentle mercy will only tend to make them worse and worse, while sharp mercy will reform them but a little. Therefore, in any case, away with them!”
-“But what will happen even if we do burn down the Jews’ synagogues and forbid them publicly to praise God, to pray, to teach, to utter God’s name? They will still keep doing it in secret. . . They must be driven from our country.”
-“I wish and I ask that our rulers who have Jewish subjects. . . act like a good physician who, when gangrene has set proceeds without mercy to cut, saw, and burn flesh, veins, bone and marrow. Such a procedure must also be followed in this instance. Burn down their synagogues, forbid all that I enumerated earlier, force them to work, and deal harshly with them, as Moses did in the wilderness, slaying three thousand lest the whole people perish.”

Oh, you meant he hated Hebrews, the chapter.:oldrazz:
 
Last edited:
You're not kidding!



Oh, you meant he hated Hebrews, the chapter.:oldrazz:

Lol yeah I meant the book.:funny:

But Gotdamn that man was a prejudiced bastard. Ive never read his thoughts on jews. Cant say im surprised tho. That attitude towards jews ran all throughout medieval europe.
 
Last edited:
Kinda mind blowing how many people there are that seem to take Blood Moon prophecies seriously.

Second coming of Christ! Sign of the apocalypse!

Good grief. This is no better than when people thought storms and comets were signs from the gods. No joke, it ****** me off how regressive some folk are. It's the 21st century. We should be long passed these superstitions.
 
Kinda mind blowing how many people there are that seem to take Blood Moon prophecies seriously.

Second coming of Christ! Sign of the apocalypse!

Good grief. This is no better than when people thought storms and comets were signs from the gods. No joke, it ****** me off how regressive some folk are. It's the 21st century. We should be long passed these superstitions.

Yeah, that annoyed me the most. No offense, these people make no logical, nonsense explanation.
 
Kinda mind blowing how many people there are that seem to take Blood Moon prophecies seriously.

Second coming of Christ! Sign of the apocalypse!

Good grief. This is no better than when people thought storms and comets were signs from the gods. No joke, it ****** me off how regressive some folk are. It's the 21st century. We should be long passed these superstitions.

What is so special about a blood moon? Its an eclipse.
 
Actually, it's when God has a nosebleed. :mad:
 
No gosh-darned wimmin in our Holy Trinity!
 
To be fair, one side of this argument (atheists) aren't claiming to have all the answers to the world's mysteries. We're just claiming that we don't believe in deities. It's Christians, for example, that claim to have the answers to it all("God did it" lol).

Also, I don't think anyone here (except for perhaps rodhulk) is trying to change the views of others in any real way. We're just discussing things because we're on a discussion forum and that's what we do here.

It's a question of reliable observable evidence vs texts which at best stem from tribal oral histories.
 
It’s a tad disingenuous to cast the “religion debate” in terms of subjective taste - like fashion or a favorite flavor of ice cream. To a large degree, we’re talking about factual descriptions of reality. For instance: Hypothetically… the Universe might be 10000 years old (as specified by a literal reading of Genesis) or over 13 billion years old (as described by science). But it can’t be both; one version is right and the other is wrong. Likewise, either gods exist or they don’t. These are claims of fact about the nature of the Universe; and the answer isn’t determined by private preference.

“Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” - Philip K. Dick :word:

I don’t think a skeptic has a particular interest or incentive in debunking a personal belief system - provided that it is truly personal. You think that meditating in front of a crystal gives you inner peace and makes you a better person? Go for it! But if the crystal starts telling you how morality, society, government, education, health care, etc. should be structured, expect a discussion on how your truth claims are determined.

Ron: Mmm. San Diego. Drink it in. It always goes down smooth. Discovered by the Germans in 1904, they named it San Diago, which of course in German means "a whale's vagina".
Veronica: No, there's no way that's correct.
Ron: I'm sorry. I was trying to impress you. I don't know what it means. I'll be honest. I don't think anyone knows what it means anymore. Scholars maintain that the translation was lost hundreds of years ago.
Veronica: Doesn't it mean "Saint Diego"?
Ron: No. No.
Veronica: No, that's--that's what it means. Really.
Ron: Well. Agree to disagree.
 
(Deleting what isn't pertinent to the topics at hand and Israel because they were supposed to know peace at founding at hasn't happened yet)



Which have been used in the same fashion to explain various things all over the world for over a thousand years using the exact same scripture every time to say it's the end times and yet it doesn't happen.

Look at all these times people have predicted things would happen and didn't. Including many times for the Second Coming and the Rapture.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dates_predicted_for_apocalyptic_event



It's never been too hard to find fossils in certain places. Mountains not being excepting from this. If you find fish bones in solid rock then you're going to figure that something happened to make it like that. Assuming that rock moves due to previous experiences with earthquakes or even tales of such things happening isn't exactly a massive leap in thinking.

1) Just look at the moon like our ancestors did. There's nothing obvious holding it in place so for them it's sound reasoning that the same thing holds the earth in place.

2)You can tell the earth is circular just by standing on a tall hill or mountain and see the curvature of the Earth. Nothing really special about that anyone from a sheep herder to the Pope could do it and see that's true.

3) Or you could look up at the sky. No big bang needed. The sky stretched out and when it's dark you can see outer space that stretches for infinity.
As per Israel, if you had read a previous post several pages ago, it was mentioned that Israel was to be brought back in disobedience at first, then that peace you mentioned shall come. All the prophecies in those two "Israel" links are/have happened since 1948 in Israel (and think at least one for Egypt).

The reason that the prophecies could never have been fulfilled for the last thousand(s) of years is because Israel had to be a nation since some end time prophecies have to do with them being a nation.

My point about the mountains is that evolution also says that this happened, that mountains actually rose that were once under water.

1) About the earth hanging on nothing, just because the moon showed it doesn't mean the earth had to be like that. Regardless, the Bible had to get that right.

2) Thousands of years ago, the earth being circular couldn't be confirmed. How would somebody know that the circular fashion you mentioned was all over the earth, that the earth was indeed circular? Aren't their accounts of people thinking it was flat? But the Bible had to get that right, too.

3) But the big bang is a science theory (?) and the Bible says something very similar to even identical. If the big bang theory is correct, then the Bible's idea of this got it correct all along.
 
Why wouldn't I? I'm not the one who refuses to have a discussion.
You dodged it at the beginning. Since you keep bringing this up, I'm thinking I've bothered you in some way and if so, I apologize. I will keep you in prayer.
 
Last edited:
No, I didn't: I addressed it twice. You simply failed to recognize the attempt. :yay:
You addressed it afterwards perhaps. But I had moved on by that point as you initially showed you weren't willing to engage in a conversation that had any respect to what I was bringing. As I mentioned, I'm here for those who are hungry.
 
1) About the earth hanging on nothing, just because the moon showed it doesn't mean the earth had to be like that. Regardless, the Bible had to get that right.

2) Thousands of years ago, the earth being circular couldn't be confirmed. How would somebody know that the circular fashion you mentioned was all over the earth, that the earth was indeed circular? Aren't their accounts of people thinking it was flat? But the Bible had to get that right, too.

3) But the big bang is a science theory (?) and the Bible says something very similar to even identical. If the big bang theory is correct, then the Bible's idea of this got it correct all along.

1) The bible got that right due to rudimentary observation of the world. Anyone could have guessed that to be true if they had a decent education even for a few thousand years back.

2) Actually as early recorded as 600 BC were there theories that the earth was round. From wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_Earth

The concept of a spherical Earth dates back to ancient Greek philosophy from around the 6th century BC,[1] but remained a matter of philosophical speculation until the 3rd century BC when Hellenistic astronomy established the spherical shape of the earth as a physical given. The Hellenistic paradigm was gradually adopted throughout the Old World during Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages.[2][3][4][5] A practical demonstration of Earth's sphericity was achieved by Ferdinand Magellan and Juan Sebastián Elcano's expedition's circumnavigation (1519−1522).[6]

3) Where exactly does it mention specifics about anything even resembling the big bang? All you've posted so far are quotes that could be interpreted as the sky or looking at stars.
 
2) Thousands of years ago, the earth being circular couldn't be confirmed. How would somebody know that the circular fashion you mentioned was all over the earth, that the earth was indeed circular? Aren't their accounts of people thinking it was flat? But the Bible had to get that right, too.
More than 2,000 years ago Eratosthenes not only showed the Earth was a SPHERE not a disc/circle with edges like the men who wrote the the bible believed, not only that but he also estimated the SPHERE's size/circumference .

All this despite the Bible and it's ignorant description of Earth as a disc/circle with edges and on pillars, in fact ignoring what it said, and using actual observation, tests and science.

[YT]0JHEqBLG650[/YT]

Edit: LOL at being way last.
 
Last edited:
You addressed it afterwards perhaps. But I had moved on by that point as you initially showed you weren't willing to engage in a conversation that had any respect to what I was bringing. As I mentioned, I'm here for those who are hungry.
Yet you're freely debating with others here who seem to be rather, "full," to borrow your phrase. How very interesting...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"