What Is Your Problem With Christianity?

[dagnarus]

I have no idea what these particular alleged prophecies in Daniel are, but I am sure that if they appeared to be fulfilled in the New Testament they were written in such a fashion as to appear that way. After all, these people in 70-100 AD had access to this book Daniel. They were trying to bolster their claims that Jesus was God or the Messiah or whatever.

 

Maybe I am misunderstanding your point, but the Dead Sea scrolls were written and dated at least a hundred years before Christ. The timing I am speaking of predicts the Messiah to be revealed in the year AD 33, and it was on that year that a chain of events occurred that coincide with the accounts of scripture of the events, as well as the timing of astrological anomalies that also occurred to verify those dates. Even if it is all made up as you are suggesting is a possibility, the timing as written in astrological events could not have been manufactured.

 

A Daniel and the seventy weeks. Quick question, What makes you say that Jesus was crucified 33 AD? There's nothing to nail down his death to this time. If we were to consider Luke's account he said that Jesus was born in 6AD when Quirinus became governor, and he began his ministry when he was 30 years old (this is significant as if you look at the levitical law this was when a priest could start the priestly service), This would suggest he had to be crucified after 36AD. Of course if you go with Matthew he had to of been born before 6BC when Herod died, so what do you know.

 

Then looking at the prophecy of Daniel, well there's, what, at least 3 different start dates which you could pick for when it starts from, depending on when you want the prophecy to end. From what I've heard if you strictly look at the prophecy in the original Aramaic (It might be Hebrew, can't remember) the punctuation suggests that the 7 weeks and the 62 weeks are meant to run concurrently with each other, and it says "messiah" not "the Messiah". Anyway sure you can jig it so that it predicts the year when Jesus may or may not have been crucified, but the fact is that you've got a lot of possible end dates you could work it out to.

 

Edit: internet infidels talks about this here http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jim_lippard/fabulous-prophecies.html, I also seem to remember a website explaining how it can be interpreted as referencing the death of the High Priest during the period of Antiochus Epiphanies. This makes sense given the rest of the content of Daniel.

[Shyone]

 

For example...

 

Are you aware of the first cause argument? It is very old and very valid, but nonetheless an unsolved mystery of science.

I studied St. Thomas Aquinas in some detail, and the First Cause argument has tons of flaws. So does the Kalam Cosmological Argument. So does the "Design" argument. If you don't know the flaws, you haven't begun to understand your religion or why others would reject it.

 

Just because something is unknown is no reason to assign God or Vishnu to it. If you "know" that God did something, why look for a "reason" or an "explanation"? Religions making scientific claims seek to halt exploration and research.

 

First cause arguments also do not necessarily indicate any god, much less the OT or Christian god, and Occam's razor suggests that "God" is an extraneous entity.

 

Assuming God doesn't have a cause is a theistic ploy with no justification or merit. God can't be proven, and his "properties" are pure speculation, so as far as I'm concerned, the arguments from first cause are no better than saying, "It's turtles all the way down". (Google that if you are confused)

 

I have to get to bed (I am a driver in a veterans day parade tomorrow) but I am curious as to what the flaws are in the argument?

 

Science gives us two scenarios in regards to the Big Bang...

 

1) All of the matter in the universe existed in a stable state in a/the singularity of compressed matter and then it expanded, or

2) All of the matter in the universe appeared suddenly and then it expanded into the universe.

 

I'm not aware of another option, but both scenarios beg the question... What caused either possibility to happen?

First, the main flaws are outlined in my post. I have highlighted the main objections.

 

What you are looking for is a scientific explanation or alternative. Feel free to reject it, but here is one theory:

 

Vacuum Fluctuations and Virtual Particles

 

Actually, the following link contains many theories by many scientists, mostly in agreement with each other regarding the ex nihilo creation of particles and the potential for creation of universes the same way.

 

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mark_vuletic/vacuum.html

 

Enjoy!

 

Incidentally, I have a degree in chemistry with a minor in physics, but I don't claim to be an expert on particle physics. I will say that inserting miracles into physical processes answers nothing and can only postpone finding a solution to a question.

 

Using God as an explanation is an admission of ignorance with the audacity of pretending to be an explanation and the result of squashing all further attempts to find an explanation.

 

When scientists say, "I don't know" it doesn't mean they aren't looking, it means they don't have enough information.

 

When you understand the difference, you'll see why I think the God hypothesis is not only useless, it is counterproductive.

[MultifariousBirdLady]

Did you become an ex-Christian because your understanding (faith) in the resurrection of Christ changed? Or is it because people and institutions have failed for a variety of reasons?

 

In my case, it was not because of the church, institutions or individual people, though there were a few particular incidents a the end which acted like icing on the deconversion cake. But the cake was already there, and couldn't be ignored.

 

I left because of the doctrines, and the resulting guilt, fear, needing to force oneself to believe in things that didn't make sense or move the heart, the elevation of "doctrine" over "people", the way the problem was always assumed to be with the person asking questions, the denigration of alternate views, etc.

 

In short, I left because of the way fundamentalist Christian beliefs straight-jacketed my mind.

[dagnarus]

Did you become an ex-Christian because your understanding (faith) in the resurrection of Christ changed? Or is it because people and institutions have failed for a variety of reasons?

 

I left because I realized that there was no way of distinguishing between communicating with God and communicating with Myself. Even if you did happen to following God and his will, how would you know?

[Japedo]

What does rising from the dead have to do with him being "God"? These are thoughts put in your head by people intrepreting what he was saying. He didn't say that that I'm aware of.

 

In the Gospel of mark it is written... "Later He appeared to the eleven as they sat at the table; and He rebuked their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they did not believe those who had seen Him after He had risen."

 

Personally, I think that the timing of His death, burial and resurrection is the most compelling evidence of His claim of deity. Although the church has distorted this timing with the celebrations of Lent and Easter, there were 4 events that occurred on the 4 spring feasts of the Jewish year that were a fulfillment of prophecy that was recorded by the prophet Daniel. I can give you the details if you like, but the resurrection is the 3rd of the 4 events and it is central to all of them.

 

 

A) The Jewish Messiah was never a "GOD" There is only one god according the Jews. The Messiah was (is) suppose to be a great man, It is said that there is a potential messiah every generation, but it is up to the person if they want the task. Think of it along the lines of Moses type guy. The Jewish Messiah according to the actual Jews, is 100% Human. The Half-god/ half-Human "God" mix came from the Roman Greek, and Egyptian beliefs, traditions, and Christianity a hodgepodge of all 3. There is not one thing that has to do with Christ that didn't predate him. Healing the sick, raising the dead, walking on water, water to wine, having a virgin mother, being born in a cave in horrific conditions, being a sungod, son god. visited hell/underworld, Was an innocent mangod who died to save humans, rose from the dead. Every one of the "story's" of Christ was already done 1000s of years before Christ by the PAGANS. There were quite a few mangods who came to save mankind. Half-god half-human, it's mythology and revolves around sun worship. Everything in the good book is paralleled to sun worship. 12 disciples = 12 sings of the Zodiac following the Sun/Son. I sit back and smirk at the nothing new under the sun passage in Ecclesiastes, It's a bitter irony. It's a clear as day (pardon the pun) to me, and I don't understand why more people don't see it. 3 is also a mystics number. Anyways... That's for another debate I guess.

 

The Christian calender goes around the Roman and greek calender and older (Roman and greek pagan holidays -Holy days). The Jewish Passover has ZERO ZILCH to do with Christ, it has to do with the Angel of death passing over the People in the story of Moses and liberating the Hebrews from Egypt.

 

Purim Which can be explained here: Religion Facts

 

B ) As Human sacrifice is against Torah laws, there is ABSOLUTE zero chance that god would renege on a law that he said would endure even after the earth faded. I will also add that symbolizing human cannibalism (AKA Communion)is also a Pagan ritual. Jew's are FORBIDDEN by Laws in the Torah to wash themselves, eat (even in symbolism), or defile blood in any way shape or form. It is a Torah law. It is believed that Blood carries the spirit or the soul of the person or animal, and that alone belongs to god.

 

 

C) As stated in Dut.12

 

Adding or taking away from the Torah is a SIGN that it's a false god. The NT and Christ entice Jews to stray off the laws, by Gods own RULE he's broken Torah Laws.

Deuteronomy 12:32, 13:1-18 (KJV)

32 What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.

1 If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder, 2 And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them; 3 Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for YHVH your God proveth you, to know whether ye love YHVH your God with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 Ye shall walk after YHVH your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and ye shall serve him, and cleave unto him. 5 And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death; because he hath spoken to turn you away from YHVH your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the house of bondage, to thrust thee out of the way which YHVH thy God commanded thee to walk in. So shalt thou put the evil away from the midst of thee.

6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; 7 Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth; 8 Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: 9 But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. 10 And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from YHVH thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage. 11 And all Israel shall hear, and fear, and shall do no more any such wickedness as this is among you.

12 If thou shalt hear say in one of thy cities, which YHVH thy God hath given thee to dwell there, saying, 13 Certain men, the children of Belial, are gone out from among you, and have withdrawn the inhabitants of their city, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which ye have not known; 14 Then shalt thou enquire, and make search, and ask diligently; and, behold, if it be truth, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought among you; 15 Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly, and all that is therein, and the cattle thereof, with the edge of the sword. 16 And thou shalt gather all the spoil of it into the midst of the street thereof, and shalt burn with fire the city, and all the spoil thereof every whit, for YHVH thy God: and it shall be an heap for ever; it shall not be built again. 17 And there shall cleave nought of the cursed thing to thine hand: that YHVH may turn from the fierceness of his anger, and shew thee mercy, and have compassion upon thee, and multiply thee, as he hath sworn unto thy fathers; 18 When thou shalt hearken to the voice of YHVH thy God, to keep all his commandments which I command thee this day, to do that which is right in the eyes of YHVH thy God.

 

It never fails to amaze me how Christians take it upon themselves to tell the Jews what Their own prophecy mean.

 

It's only the tip of the iceberg, but it's a nice place to start. Start at the beginning, Learn the Jewish terms and customs to get a grasp of what the "Original Testament by the people who still follow all Torah laws that they are able to. Go talk to Rabbis and learn for yourself. The Christian church is completely ignorant about Jewish History therefor completely Ignorant about the original messiah message.

 

Stepping stones down a path of knowledge and understanding. I became an ex-Cer because I was on a mission to "Seek" and "Find" the one true God, the one "True way". Questions are a necessity when trying to fact find and searching for god, believing blindly just because you're told to, keeps you blind.

 

Hell is another thing borrowed from the Greek/ Egyptian and Roam cultures. It's known as the Underworld, Hades, among other things. Fear is a great tool keeping one in check. Tell a person they aren't allowed to find god by seeking just believing, keeps the masses ignorant.

 

I studied Judaism in depth, it helped me immensely in calming my fears about end times and other horrific abuses perpetrated by the cult called Christianity.

 

 

I started on my way to "Find GOD" by knowing rotten fruit when I saw it. I knew if I asked I would receive, the only thing I never expected was to find there was No God that could be found. There might be one sure, but I can not say yes or no to it, so I'm in the could be but I've seen no evidence for it stage, I'm comfortable with that but a person that has all the answers will stop looking.

 

As another person stated, I didn't willy nilly just get up one day and leave God. It's been years of constant looking and learning. Knowledge is power, and as also stated, Knowledge is known as the "devils tool" by churches. The facts don't sit right with the beliefs. If facts can't change then it must be the beliefs that are wrong, right?

[Tabula Rasa]

I was warned to move along by one poster, but honestly I find that type of talk very presumptuous. If after talking with me here you still think I should move along, then perhaps I will. But to suggest I move along before that isn't very nice, wouldn't you agree? I didn't come here to argue with anyone. I came out of curiosity. I asked a very simple question and got a lot of very good answers for which I thank you all for sharing.

 

Windwalker, I'll admit that I was a bit harsh. For that I apologize. The reason I said what I did, is because we get a lot of christians who give us a lot of the same old tired arguments. I suspected that you were going to use the same tactics. I had basically said that unless you had some strong arguments for christianity, you'd probably better "move along" is because we have some extremely knowledgeable members who can and have debunked and disproved most arguments including the tough ones like the "Kalaam Cosmological Argument". Essentially, I was saying that unless you were ready to dig in with some strong arguments, you'd be wasting your time here. Hence the suggestion to otherwise "Move on."

 

To further clarify my reason for rejecting Christianity , the overall feel I get from christian doctrine is that Yahweh created us knowing we'd fall, and even creating the method of our downfall. And then giving humanity a bloody, horrific,

confusing way to get "saved".(How do you know if you've gotten saved the right way, all the different doctrines.)

To sum it up, it seems as if Yahweh set up humanity to fall so he could make some of them grovel in terror in order to be saved, and if they refused to bow they'd be eternally tormented for not bowing down to his malevolent will.

 

I don't have a problem with the idea of a God existing. I DO have a problem with the idea of the universe being ruled by an evil god who created us just to torment us.

 

I hope that clears things up.

[Hungrydingo]

The reason I am an ex-christian:

 

-actually following the bible is very hard to do, the old fashioned "values" it presents isn't very compatible for an increasingly secular society

-Bad things happen to good people, good things happen to very bad people. I felt I was a good person who stuck to my faith, yet that did absolutely nothing in life for me but cause me to miss out on enjoying my youth as much as I could have

-inconsistencies in the bible

-horrible, violent message in the bible, mostly the Old Testament

-inability to verify who actually wrote most of the bible

-the church going community which is one the most fake, and despicable communities out there. Gossip mongering, bored housewives with a "holier than thou" attitude.

-Jesus isn't unique, Krishna, Mithras, and Horus did everything Jesus

and finally

-the christian god is a brutal and jealous god who claims to be loving yet causes quite a bit of suffering for most of his people. A loving god doesn't continuously punish people for generations because of what 2 people did in the beginning, nor does he sent unbaptized babies to hell or wipe out his own people with extreme prejudice.

[Vixentrox]

I rejected Christianity for many reasons but the errors and inconsistancies in the Bible were prime among them. A book that supposedly come from god shouldn't be so riddled with errors and should be easily understood by all who read it. God isn't the author of confusion supposedly but there has been nothing but confusion when it comes to Christianity, hence the multitudes of sects all claiming that their brand is the right brand.

[mwc]

Sorry, but that's how I roll.

I'm sure it is.

 

Let me put it like this to separate the man from the facts the man tried to communicate...

 

When the singularity expanded at the moment of the Big Bang, it is not at all reasonable to suggest that time could be treated like time here and now. The forces that we know effect time where in a state of mind numbing transformation as the laws of the universe as we understand them were literally being created. Looking back to that event we can apply what we do know from the laws of science and see very clearly that time itself was very contracted at that specific moment in the history of the universe. As all of the matter in the universe expanded and space was literally being created, time was influenced by variations in gravity and the speed in which the universe was expanding. When you look at it from the point of origin to here and now, it would be highly inaccurate to describe the universe as being 15 billion years old. In fact it would be as as inaccurate as describing it as 5,000 years old if you were trying to measure that time from this particular point in the universe.

 

Schroeder explained that when we apply what we know of the Creation event (Big Bang) and we look at it from both angles, there is a very neat overlay that produces a harmony that is too uncanny to ignore. The events themselves match, the time lines match, and we are left with a stunning example of harmony between Genesis and science.

So you clicked on the various links and read the following then:

Flew's Flawed Science

by Victor J. Stenger

 

The following article is from Free Inquiry magazine, Volume 25, Number 2.

 

The late-in-life “conversion” of philosopher Antony Flew from atheism to belief in God has been widely reported in the media.1 In a recent interview with Gary Habermas, misleadingly titled “My Pilgrimage from Atheism to Theism,” Flew explains his new position, which he identifies as deism rather than theism.2 Richard Carrier has also conducted a correspondence with Flew, which clarifies some of the issues.3

 

Flew has not changed his mind on the inadequacy of the various philosophical arguments for God, which he very ably covered in his classic work, God and Philosophy.4 For example, he still does not buy into the moral argument, and remains unimpressed by the kalâm cosmological argument.5 However, he says he is impressed by recent claims that science has discovered evidence for God, although he admits to Carrier that he has not kept up with the scientific critiques of those arguments.6

 

Flew does not completely reject the theistic revelation of scientific facts. As he tells Habermas, “ I am open to it, but not enthusiastic about potential revelation from God. On the positive side, for example, I am very much impressed with physicist Gerald Schroeder’s comments on Genesis 1. That this biblical account might be scientifically accurate raises the possibility that it is revelation.”

 

Flew has also warmed to contemporary design arguments: “I think that the most impressive arguments for God’s existence are those that are supported by recent scientific discoveries. However, I think the argument to Intelligent Design is enormously stronger than it was when I first met it.”

Is Genesis “Scientifically Accurate”?

 

In his 1998 book, The Science of God, and other works,7 Gerald Schroeder attempts to reconcile the Bible with modern science. I will only address the particular claim that Flew finds impressive, that our current cosmological understanding of the history of the universe was revealed in Genesis.8

 

Schroeder asserts that the six days of creation in the Bible really span 15.75 billion years of “cosmic time.” This he regards as a successful biblical prophecy, since it is a mere two billion years greater than the current best estimate of the age of the universe.

 

Let us see how Schroeder extracts this remarkable prophecy from Genesis. He obtains the cosmic time for creation by multiplying the six days of biblical time by the redshift of light at a moment in the early universe called “quark confinement.” The redshift tells us how much the frequency of a particular atomic spectral line decreases because of the expansion of the universe. That frequency, Schroeder argues, is the only proper clock for measuring cosmic time. At quark confinement, when atomic nuclei first form, the redshift is about a factor of a trillion.

 

Actually, Schroeder assumes a redshift factor of 9.5x10¹¹. A more precise value, by current estimates, is 4.4x10¹², which would have the six biblical days of creation last 72 billion years. So the biblical prophecy, by Schroeder’s own method of calculation, is over four times too high.

 

In any case, according to Schroeder’s choice of numbers, the first biblical day of creation is eight billion cosmic years long. Each succeeding day is half as long as the previous one in cosmic time, so, by the magic of the exponential function, we arrive at the time of Adam and Eve (plus or minus two billion years), at which moment conventional human time takes over. The 6,000 or so years from then to now, in human time, is insignificant on this scale, the last day of creation being 250 million cosmic years long.

 

As usual, prophecy is easy after the fact. Clearly, Schroeder played around with the numbers until he found that quark confinement gave him roughly the answer he wanted—and even then, he used the wrong number. But in any case, our universe did not begin at quark confinement. It actually began about a millionth of a second earlier, at the so-called Planck time. At this time, the redshift was 1.6x10³⁰. If Schroeder had used this redshift for his calculation, the six days of creation would have lasted over 10²⁸ cosmic years!

 

Schroeder claims he chose quark confinement since, in day one of Genesis, “light is separated from darkness.” But there was no light at quark confinement. It took about another 400,000 years for light to appear, when radiation finally “decoupled” from matter. If Schroeder had used the redshift at radiation decoupling for his calculation, the six days of creation would have lasted only 6,000 years (not to be confused with the 6,000 years since Adam and Eve).

 

When I first read The Science of God, I thought it was a clever spoof on religious apologetics. Come on, Gerald, admit you are pulling Antony’s leg!

 

In fact, the creation story in Genesis looks nothing like Big Bang cosmology—no matter how you spin it. In the Bible, the universe is a firmament and Earth is fixed and immovable (not to mention flat). In reality, the universe is expanding and Earth rotates about the sun. In the Bible, Earth is created in the first “day,” before the sun, moon, and stars. In reality, Earth did not form until nine billion years after the Big Bang and after the sun and many other stars.

 

Listen, I don't expect any of you to buy any of this.

Of course you expect us to buy this and much more. That's the entire reason you're here. Don't be ashamed to admit it. You're not the first.

 

mwc

[Evolution_beyond]

I believe that Buddha was a seeker who was indeed enlightened and sought God with all of his heart.

 

I don't think the Buddha believed in God. He was kind of agnostic, thinking that it was pointless to answer the question of whether there is a god because it was a distraction from asking the questions that really matter.

 

In fact I find very little in other world religions that honestly and earnestly seek the truth that I have a problem with, the only exception being when the writings of a religion speaks in the third person for God. As far as I know, only Islam does this aside from Christianity and Judaism. I could be wrong about that, but it is a quality that I understand to be unique among Abrahamic religions.

 

I think you mean first person. Third person is he or she. First person is I or me.

[Big.blue.nation]

 

So my question to those of you who are ex-Christians is very simple...

 

Did you become an ex-Christian because your understanding (faith) in the resurrection of Christ changed? Or is it because people and institutions have failed for a variety of reasons?

 

I no longer believe because I can't believe. It was a case of personal integrity.

 

I echo this response as well. In a way I was actually sad to discover what I had believed for 20 years to be un-true, but simply couldn't ignore what I had learned. For me it's kind of like believing in Santa Claus; but when you start reading the history books and looking at the maps and discover the North Pole is an empty frozen ocean, as much as you don't want to lose those magical feelings you had as a child during Christmas, you just simply know it's a fairy tale. You can't un-know at that point, the hard truth is too much to ignore. Why should we apologize or feel ashamed to only know the truth for what it (including Christianity) is?

 

By the way, I do love the holiday season and Santa and hope I didn't sound too much like a scrooge...

[Guest]

 

Did you become an ex-Christian because your understanding (faith) in the resurrection of Christ changed? Or is it because people and institutions have failed for a variety of reasons?

 

Right around the time I hit puberty, I realized that the entire story was laughable. A Jewish zombie who is his own father has sex with a human so he can become human and have himself sacrificed to himself to appease his own anger at the mistakes of the creatures he made imperfect to begin with. He's omnipotent, yet this is the "plan" he comes up with?

 

 

I still have trouble dealing with adults who can not see that this is a mythological story, and a poorly written one at that.

 

I could give you lots of details about just about every bit of xtian theology there is, but I believe that above paragraph sums it all up nicely.

[Guest]

 

Too much study, thinking and rationality often leads to ex-Christianity, if not atheism. It's a common theme around here.

 

As I was told many times as I started to question things, "Be careful, the devil fools you with logic."

[Guest]

 

Personally, I think that the timing of His death, burial and resurrection is the most compelling evidence of His claim of deity. Although the church has distorted this timing with the celebrations of Lent and Easter, there were 4 events that occurred on the 4 spring feasts of the Jewish year that were a fulfillment of prophecy that was recorded by the prophet Daniel. I can give you the details if you like, but the resurrection is the 3rd of the 4 events and it is central to all of them.

 

Don't you think an all powerful deity could come up with a better plan that torture and death? In fact, why can't he just forgive humans, seeing as god set us up from the start?!?!?!? Really, nobody here is omnipotent or omniscient, yet I think most all of us could agree that simply forgiving humans is infinitely better and more compassionate for an all powerful being to do.

 

Don't you?

[Wind Walker]

Listen, I don't expect any of you to buy any of this.

Of course you expect us to buy this and much more. That's the entire reason you're here. Don't be ashamed to admit it. You're not the first.

 

mwc

 

Sorry mwc, but I'm here out of curiosity. I know that people in places like this are pretty convinced of what they believe. I asked a question and got tons of answers, and I appreciate that. I was also asked a lot questions, and I answered them to the best of my ability. Francis of Assisi told his followers: "Constantly proclaim the Gospel; speak if you must". I believe that he was correct.

[MultifariousBirdLady]

It never fails to amaze me how Christians take it upon themselves to tell the Jews what Their own prophecy mean.

 

Indeed! It was very informative for me to get a set of tapes from a group called "Jews for Judaism" that explained how Jews interpreted the various prophecies and other texts of the Hebrew Scriptures, and how the Christian twisting of these various verses really amounted to ripping things out of context or in some cases outright mistranslation. Extremely eye-opening.

 

BTW, I love your avatar/icon!

[florduh]

Wind Walker, I appreciate your curiosity. As ex-Christians, we don't have many unanswered questions about the religion. We've been there. What I do find interesting is the array of beliefs that various visiting Christians bring to this forum.

 

We've seen every imaginable belief and doctrine - there is no hell, there is a hell but it's justified, get saved because the end is nigh, the end isn't nigh but get saved anyway, the earth is six thousand years old, the earth is not six thousand years old, Mary was a virgin, Mary wasn't a virgin, etc. Every position is of course supported by scripture. You're just another one with quirky interpretations and some views that aren't mainstream.

 

Are you all reading different Bibles? Are there different Holy Spirits guiding your understanding? (Rhetorical question).

 

Thanks for playing.

[Shyone]

 

I echo this response as well. In a way I was actually sad to discover what I had believed for 20 years to be un-true, but simply couldn't ignore what I had learned. For me it's kind of like believing in Santa Claus; but when you start reading the history books and looking at the maps and discover the North Pole is an empty frozen ocean, as much as you don't want to lose those magical feelings you had as a child during Christmas, you just simply know it's a fairy tale. You can't un-know at that point, the hard truth is too much to ignore. Why should we apologize or feel ashamed to only know the truth for what it (including Christianity) is?

 

By the way, I do love the holiday season and Santa and hope I didn't sound too much like a scrooge...

But when it's not Christmas, Santa's workshop is invisible - or under the ice - or in heaven.

 

I'm a Santa Apologist.

[Karhoof]

In the Gospel of mark it is written... "Later He appeared to the eleven as they sat at the table; and He rebuked their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they did not believe those who had seen Him after He had risen."

You are aware that GMark 16:9-20 was a later addition, aren't you? (along with the first 18 vss. and the entire last chapter of GJohn, just to mention a few) The oldest known texts stop with the women running away and saying nothing to anyone about what they saw (an empty tomb).

So, the very first written gospel we have, that the other synoptic gospels are known to have copied from, doesn't have any risen messiah at all. Just a missing body.

Why would these verses be added by someone during the very time when this brand new theology was morphing and taking shape?

 

 

You also keep saying that you have these "Truths". I had asked you back on page one what these "Truths" are, but I haven't seen any reply.

Thank you in advance.

 

 

 

 

Great img. L!

[Vigile]

All of you pretty much replied with more or less with the same message... issues with the rules as set forth in scripture or just flat out believing that scripture is just a work of mankind.

 

You seem to have a serious problem with reading comprehension.

 

As for me, the problems are myriad and too many to list. At the top, however, is the fact that evidence to back up some seriously outlandish claims is lacking and the fact that the religion is overly bent on dehumanizing humanity and burdening them with undue guilt.

[Ouroboros]

All of you pretty much replied with more or less with the same message... issues with the rules as set forth in scripture or just flat out believing that scripture is just a work of mankind.

 

You seem to have a serious problem with reading comprehension.

 

As for me, the problems are myriad and too many to list. At the top, however, is the fact that evidence to back up some seriously outlandish claims is lacking and the fact that the religion is overly bent on dehumanizing humanity and burdening them with undue guilt.

Agree. I only saw one post that (somewhat jokingly) stated anything that I could interpret as "issues with the rules."

 

Most of them were, "it's all bunk because I used my brain and figured it out." Which, of course, perhaps could be interpreted as, "scripture is just a work of mankind." But not exactly though.

 

It only proves that religion makes people look at the world through colored lenses. They can't see it for what it really is.

[Vigile]

 

Did you become an ex-Christian because your understanding (faith) in the resurrection of Christ changed? Or is it because people and institutions have failed for a variety of reasons?

 

Right around the time I hit puberty, I realized that the entire story was laughable. A Jewish zombie who is his own father has sex with a human so he can become human and have himself sacrificed to himself to appease his own anger at the mistakes of the creatures he made imperfect to begin with. He's omnipotent, yet this is the "plan" he comes up with?

 

 

I still have trouble dealing with adults who can not see that this is a mythological story, and a poorly written one at that.

 

I could give you lots of details about just about every bit of xtian theology there is, but I believe that above paragraph sums it all up nicely.

 

 

Yeah, really there's not much more to add. The longer answers other posters are giving are more than likely just therapeutic or fun on their part but it's really not necessary to go into detail until you can overcome the 800 pd gorilla in the room that is the ridiculous sacrifice and resurrection myth.

[par4dcourse]

Wind Walker, I appreciate your curiosity. As ex-Christians, we don't have many unanswered questions about the religion. We've been there. What I do find interesting is the array of beliefs that various visiting Christians bring to this forum.

 

We've seen every imaginable belief and doctrine - there is no hell, there is a hell but it's justified, get saved because the end is nigh, the end isn't nigh but get saved anyway, the earth is six thousand years old, the earth is not six thousand years old, Mary was a virgin, Mary wasn't a virgin, etc. Every position is of course supported by scripture. You're just another one with quirky interpretations and some views that aren't mainstream.

 

Are you all reading different Bibles? Are there different Holy Spirits guiding your understanding? (Rhetorical question).

 

Thanks for playing..

But..but...this one has the TRUTH^TM

He has the One True WayTM

 

I'm sorry I can't treat our xian-of-the-week more seriously, but there's so damn man;y of them and they all say the same damn thing.

[monkeygirl]

The word "yom" as used in the Genesis creation story is in the same form as in other scriptures of the old testament where it clearly means a regular day, including other scriptures in Genesis.

 

That argument by old earth creationist use is not valid.

[Wind Walker]

The word "yom" as used in the Genesis creation story is in the same form as in other scriptures of the old testament where it clearly means a regular day, including other scriptures in Genesis.

 

That argument by old earth creationist use is not valid.

 

Actually it is valid because it is not exclusively used as a "day". You can read the different meanings of the word yowm here: http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H3117&t=KJV

 

Young Earth Creationists are quite adamant in their agreement with you, but I respectfully disagree. The actual scientific evidence leads me to believe that is a time period in a general sense, and the way I personally interpret scripture is to look for the meaning of the text based upon what the text says in the light of all known truth. YECs cite the necessity for yowm to mean day largely because it drives other theological positions that they cling to.