Jump to content

RHEMtron

Regular Member
  • Content Count

    484
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by RHEMtron

  1. Q: What kind of bee makes milk? A: A Boo-Bee!!
  2. Q: How do you make a female archaeologist mad? A: Give them a tampon and ask them what period it's from
  3. http://www.crosswalk.com/ Although a Christian site, the concordance and lexicon tools are very helpful
  4. welcome to the forums! no worries man. you have friends in us
  5. Welcome aboard! Looking forward to hearing from you.... nice title for your testies moany
  6. Welp... it's your choice, but be careful about looking down on them. You just end up becoming like a Christian who looks down on non-believers.... Isnt it amazing that youre happier and feel more free when you do away with Christianity ? Welcome to the forums. This is your new church now
  7. So basically it's what i initially said. You reject scripture that's older than the synoptic gospels and which were at one point, before the Council of Nicea, reguarded higher and taught more than the other gospels, because it doesnt line up with what youve been taught. Whew... that was the longest sentence in history . Since many of those gospels, especially the gnostics ones, precede the synoptic gospels youre familiar with, wouldnt it be more true to say youre synoptic sciptures dont line up with the older gospels that precede it? Of course... when a biased person researches biased claims that line up with their biased traditional teachings and beliefs, then one will believe them to the true.... especially when one wants it to be true. Study with a rabbi, and i bet youll learn something different. Refer back to Hans response for this. The only thing i want to add is that you mentioned "their accounts". How do you define accounts? The people you mentioned lived in the 2nd-3rd century. You yourself stated this. So could it be an account? The other thing i wanted to mention is that yes, they couldve gone to any lengths... but keep in mind it was the Christians who went into any lengths to make it seem Jesus, and their beliefs about him, existed in the first place. They added verses into the bible and into historical works of other people. i.e. Mark 16:9-20 and Josephus' Testimonium Flavum. Im still awaiting a response to my question about taking a book to be true because it contains errors: Im sorry. Im not understanding the logic. A book that has errors and contradictions does not add to it's reliability. If in med-school, my surgical books said to "never inject coccaine into a patient, but instead always give topically," but in another part of it it says "always inject coccaine into a patient," we would have a problem there. One, it's true to never inject coccaine. Two, I would lose my license for doing so. Three, i'd have to question everything the book had taught. Four, i'd have to reject that book and learn from a new one. *snip* All i know is, any book that misleads, contains errors, and contradicts i choose not to trust. Applying it to a person, it doesnt makes them more trustworthy either. Moreover, a person in a book that contradicts themeselves and the book, doesnt make them trustworthy either.
  8. granted... First off, which "inspired word" do you place your trust in? Catholic Bible, Any of the Reformation Bibles, etc. Im not trying to bait you into another discussion, or tear up your comments. I just want to be able to understand where youre coming from. Second, why do you believe it to be the most reliable and accurate? Im sorry. Im not understanding the logic. A book that has errors and contradictions does not add to it's reliability. If in med-school, my surgical books said to "never inject coccaine into a patient, but instead always give topically," but in another part of it it says "always inject coccaine into a patient," we would have a problem there. One, it's true to never inject coccaine. Two, I would lose my license for doing so. Three, i'd have to question everything the book had taught. Four, i'd have to reject that book and learn from a new one. Great. The issue of contradictions we can discuss in another thread then I still contend a book is more trustworthy for not having any errors. But again i ask, what makes the book you read more trustworthy from other "inspired words" of God? Is it because what the other scriptures say dont agree with what you were taught to believe? And also, what makes it more trustworthy than any other religious books? We can all contend here that it has been altered from it's original. In more ways than one i might add. Evidence shows, through comparisons of later discoveries of older manuscripts and linguistics, that the synoptic Gospels have been altered. The most famous one is in "the Great Commission". It is widely accepted by secular and non-secular scholars that Mark 16:9-20 were later added to try and coincide with the Epistles of Paul. Another way, though more of a technicality but still misleading, is how the New Testament quotes phrophecies in the Old Testament (I will not speak of how the prophecies are taken out of context because it's not relevant at this point. That we can discuss in a separate thread). In the verses they quote, the words are altered in a way to change the meaning of the prophecy. Changing the word Ephratha, which is the name of a person and a clan, with the land of Judah greatly changes the meaning of a verse. you can check out what i speak of here: http://www.ex-christian.net/index.php?show...mp;#entry191922 All i know is, any book that misleads, contains errors, and contradicts i choose not to trust. Applying it to a person, it doesnt makes them more trustworthy either. Moreover, a person in a book that contradicts themeselves and the book, doesnt make them trustworthy either. -Rhem
  9. First, I just wanted to commend you for knowing when to concede and having a partially open mind. If you believe in God, that's fine with us. A lot of us here are deists and agnostics, so it doesnt bother us. Our problem now, well at least mine anyway, is that you choose to worship a book, which you admit contains inconsistencies and contradictions. How can you do that?
  10. Great... on the subject of lying and church fathers: http://www.angelfire.com/band/kissed/fraud.html Angustine of Hippo, the greatest figure in Christian antiquity, wrote: "It is lawful, then, to him that discusses, disputes and preaches of things eternal, or to him that narrates of things temporal pertaining to religion or piety, to conceal at fitting times whatever seems fit to be concealed." Augustine, On Lying, c. 19 Eusebius, a 4th century Bishop and ecclesiastical historian, wrote that he unscrupulously suppressed all that would be a disgrace to early Christianity. Ecclesiastical History, vol. 8, c.21. Edward Gibbon confirms this. He writes: "The gravest of all the ecclesiastical historians, Eusebius himself, indirectly confesses that he has related whatever might redound to the glory, and that he has suppressed all that would tend to the disgrace, of religion. Such an acknowledgement will naturally excite a suspicion that a writer who has so openly violated one of the fundamental laws of history has not paid a very strict observation of the other." E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, c. 16 (1883). None other than Paul of Tarsus admits of trickery (2 Cor. 12.16), imposture (1 Cor. 9.19-20), and deception. He wrote: "For if the truth of God hath more abounded by my lie unto his glory, why yet am I also adjudged a sinner?" Romans 3.7 (King James Version) Funny how the word "published" is used... but anyhow, scholars widely accept that "Matthew's" work was written between 80-100 C.E. That means it was written somewhere 10-40 years after the death of Peter and Paul, and not while they were preaching. "Mark's" Gospel is accepted as being written between 65-80 C.E. So i guess i can agree that it was written after Peter and Paul's departure, if by departure you mean they died. There was no reason for "Mark" to write down what Peter preached considering there was a Gospel of Peter (70-160 C.E.), which was actually reguarded higher and used more than the other Gospels. Recorded the Gospel which Paul declared? I dont remember Paul writing, or declaring, any stories, parables, and accounts of Jesus' life.
  11. Another thing to do is type in anything Christian related into Wikipedia.
  12. yeeeeeup. i was just like you. i was raised catholic, but i read books on astronomy, biology, paleontology, philosophy, and world history as a kid. so pretty much i was always one of those "catholic (or christian) by name" people. because of that, i never even bothered to read the bible because it just seemed ridiculous from page one. welcome to the site
  13. of course not... we were all taught on bible subject matters with a bias. no one ever mentions negative stories, inconsistencies, contradictions, and etc. etc. etc. than you should be highly irritated by moses for doing this. but anyhow.... we shouldnt make assumptions, but why not simply assume he didnt write the scriptures attributed to him? rarely does anyone ever write in the 3rd person. nowhere in the bible does it ever have a person talking in 3rd person... especially where the authorship has been authenticated. agreed. nobody knows who wrote Pentateuch. the only reason why people believe Moses wrote the Pentateuch is because of references in the synoptic gospel that were taken out of context. again we shouldnt assume, but actually i once heard that it was actually Joshua who wrote the books, or at least was said to have finished it for Moses, all based on your logic. anywho... with that being said, ill drop the subject matter. we're deviating from the OP.
  14. welp... we're glad to have you here freeday. han said that there are christians on this site that we are friends with and actually enjoy having here... but a lot of us here are borderline deist/agnostic as well. some us still believe in god, just not in the bibilical sense. we are no longer indoctrinated thanks to really reading the bible. every point we make is historically and scripturally based. im glad to see you have an open mind to learning... now with that being said, you stated: Why would he write in the third person? Why didnt he ever write "I did this" instead of "Moses did this"? And how was he able to write about his own death?
  15. The dragon is listed several time in the canonical bible. Mostly in the Old Testament and in Revelations. We have a discussion about it in this thread: http://www.ex-christian.net/index.php?show...56entry188956 You cant disregard something just because it's inconsistent with your beliefs. If a racist said people who arent racist are wrong because it's inconsistent with their belief, does that it true, or him a better person? The only reason why these scriptures were voted out was because they said it was inconsistent with their beliefs. That right away violates what was commanded by God: And we must not forget what was said in the New Testament about ALL SCRIPTURE that was written.
  16. Our visciousness is something you care not to endure? Your very scripture instructs you to stand your ground when someone asks you about your faith and beliefs. Some Christian you are. Instead of responding with your life story, how bout responding to our arguments. Say youre not brainwashed, but reading your life story, it looks like you have been brainwashed since you were young. you speak of growing because people have challenged you... now that we have challenged you, you run away because youre starting to see the truth, but cognitive dissonace is kicking in.
  17. Humans: yes... im disappointed with the authors of the bible. they couldve at least gotten their story straight. Jesus: He said "If you ask me anything in My name, i will do it" LIAR!! Or maybe i was just asking the wrong name.... Okay now you lie!!! Youre probably gonna quote Paul, so im going to quote Job... a person who actually spoke with the head honcho God himself: Im agnostic.... 50% sure and 50% unsure. Like you admitted. We cant know.... so stop acting like you know. Just because youre saved doesnt mean youre going to perform the same "sinful" acts. Learn from your mistakes. It's that simple. That doesnt mean you have to continually kiss ass. First off... slave?!?! Is that the FREE WILL you spoke of? I dont want to be a slave to anybody. Second... are you implying that if im not a slave to Jesus that means im a bad person? That's pretty self-righteous... Again to acknowledge youre living a better, moral life because your are Christian is self-righteous. You must not pay attention to Jesus. What did he say about people who were self-righteous and haughty because of their beliefs? How sad that someone who is ignorant of the truth tries to persuade the enlightened back to ignorance. The truth has set us free.... Just keep in mind the name of the forum. This is a place for us EX-Christians to discuss. We do not advertise Christians to come here. You came here out of your own accord. Youre the evangelist. A relationship? You dont even address God by his name. So many Christians in this world have been persecuted, tortured, raped, murdered, beaten, abused, molested, etc.... where was this significant other for 2000 years while all this was going on? Youre in a relationship with your husband. If he just stood by and did nothing, i bet you would leave him. We deconverted because we searched the truth. Like i said... the truth has set us free. We continually still seek knowledge and truth. What about you? Can you say the same? You cant find the truth if you limit yourself to only the bible(well actually you can). Well Istillbelieve... just rhemember... BELIEF is NOT the Same as TRUTH!!
  18. no prob about the length. seems like you lived quite a life. youre not alone though. i can relate to you on sooooOOOoo many levels. just glad you now have that piece of mind.
  19. nice kuro nice!!! i'd like to see you do an ongoing series where you take stories from the bible and write about em like you did here.
  20. kudos to you and welcome to the site. just remember the first step to acceptance, is to accept yourself. be comfortable and confident with who you are. trust me. youre not weird. fweethawt is weird... but youre not jk... being weird just means we're individuals.
  21. just wanted to restart this thread for the new people, and to also add: Jesus Did Not Exist Evil Bible Truth About the Trinity
  22. that sounds pretty damn interesting. i wanna know i wanna know! you should start another thread listing these cases... or a link to a site that does.
  23. like they said... power of suggestion and power of belief. i just wanted to add that many of the feelings associated with religion can be like a placebo effect... or another way to view someone being filled with the holy spirit is like watching those fans cry at a beatles, elvis, or michael jackson concert. just check out the thread we have here of people dancing and going into convulsions at church!! hilllllarious!! =D
  24. wow... good jog godless!! i meant for this thread to help other people, but it looks like it's gonna help me too haha.
  25. i think it would be a good idea to list references down for our newly deconverted exchristians, those in the process of deconverting, and for xtians who need to open their minds to the truth. it could be websites with essays, scholarly work, etc.... or even names of books and authors. ill go first, and if you guys think it's a good idea... just add on. websites: Agnostic Review of Christianity [a favorite of mine and SkepticOfBible] Rejection of Pascal's Wager History of Christianity and the Bible Apocyrphas Index books: The New Testament : A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings by Bart Ehrman The Lost Bible: Forgotten Scriptures Revealed by JR Porter
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.