falemon Posted November 25, 2012 Share Posted November 25, 2012 Here I will explain why deconversion, though a very important process we should continue, is not the most effective tool we have at our disposal. Inside the Bible itself are the blueprints for building a civilisation, a society and a group that grows virally. If you examine some key numbers with Jesus you will see it closely follows what we know about human communication. Jesus had many disciples, of which 12 were close, and yet he kept a few even closer. Google discovered that most human beings can only really maintain about 160 of their friends at a distance, regularly communicate with around 40 in occasional messages each month. But they found we tend to have a tight bond with around 10-12, who we communicate with most often, then another 4 or so that we communicate with offline much more often than anyone else. We should note that the Roman legions were around 160 in number IIRC. Now what does the Bible teach us? that virality is our friend. By taking heed of how the early church was able to grow we can behave in a similar way. Focus on teaching others how to deconvert, and also sow a seed from as early in life. This means that we want to be equipping children with defences from an early age to immunise them against Christianity, and also we don't just want to heal our friends, we want our friends to become healers. How can one chase a thousand and two chase ten thousand? through exponents. Is that verse hinting at the need to teach ten to chase a thousand also? Perhaps we need a deconversion Bible (or guidebook) too. One thing that churches of today do is follow the way of the Catholic group of Christians. They were a Christian sect who seemed to resemble the Roman army, hence why when Constantine 'converted' to Christianity he adopted that group. Like the Roman army they have captains (pastors), who recruit soldiers (ministers) to fight (serve). Their communication structure of bishops overseeing other pastors allowed a chain of command. Also you will find that the ministers would often play the role of presales, where they will meet and greet new recruits but it was down to the pastor and more established ministers to close the sale. In short, an individual does not waste time trying to 'convert' (or deconvert in our case) a person they cannot close on, but rather sends them to the ones with the strongest skill in that area. How often do you see preachers who cannot talk well leading large groups? Usually pastors are people who are influential, so don't worry if you are not deconverting many people successfully. Don't be like those Christians who blindly try to shove the scripture down your throat, the Bible has many teachings about leadership that we should use. And in my opinion the Judaism was created to denounce the idea of many gods. Christianity was created to take this one step further to people living more self sufficient lives, but to lay the groundwork of denouncing the God described in Judaism. We are the next generation, whose are here to tidy it all up now, to dissolve it all, it's not needed now, the world is enlightened. Just a few thoughts, feel free to chime in, share your thoughts, offer better ideas to my own as these are ideas, not the infallible word of anything other than my own simpleton mind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RipVanWinkle Posted November 25, 2012 Share Posted November 25, 2012 Wow. Yours is thought out as well as any comment I've read. Very good and thank you for your excellant analysis. bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator Joshpantera Posted November 25, 2012 Moderator Share Posted November 25, 2012 And in my opinion the Judaism was created to denounce the idea of many gods. Christianity was created to take this one step further to people living more self sufficient lives, but to lay the groundwork of denouncing the God described in Judaism. We are the next generation, whose are here to tidy it all up now, to dissolve it all, it's not needed now, the world is enlightened. I mentioned something similar on the Bart Ehrman "Jesus Existed" thread. I was explaining how most of the mythicists are former Christians who have ventured out and learned about eastern philosophical concepts and are either mystics now or atheists of some variety who have an interest in Biblical criticism and basically bull dozing the literalism and historicity of the Bible that doesn't add up with respect to modern archaeology and scholarship. In some cases the only objective is to show that it's all fiction and move towards secular interests instead. In other cases the interest is actually in hitting the literalism and historicity hard because the symbols are spiritual oriented and the literalism and historicity is a stumbling block focus keeping people away from getting whatever the spiritual or enlightened messages happen to be. I would expect that both views gel with what you're proposing. It's about time to clean up the mess. By dissolve it all you mean the organized religious institutions and not personal enlightened spirituality, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
falemon Posted November 25, 2012 Author Share Posted November 25, 2012 Bill, glad you enjoyed it, and feel free to share any of your own thoughts. I would expect that both views gel with what you're proposing. It's about time to clean up the mess. By dissolve it all you mean the organized religious institutions and not personal enlightened spirituality, right? Correct, and also the shutdown of indoctrination, I think we can do without that completely Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
centauri Posted November 25, 2012 Share Posted November 25, 2012 We should note that the Roman legions were around 160 in number IIRC. As an aside, Roman legions numbered about 3,000-5,500 depending on era. A Roman cohort numbered about 500. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
falemon Posted November 25, 2012 Author Share Posted November 25, 2012 We should note that the Roman legions were around 160 in number IIRC. As an aside, Roman legions numbered about 3,000-5,500 depending on era. A Roman cohort numbered about 500. Ah, I must have been thinking of the 120 men cavalry unit (below). Maybe the 160 number is what google found was closer to the average (more) http://www.unrv.com/military/legion.php Legio: (Legion) consisted of 10 cohorts. Additionally each Legion had a 120 man Alae (cavalry unit) called the Eques Legionis permanently attached to it possibly to be used as scouts and messengers. Therefore the total fighting strength of a Legion: The First Cohort totaling 800 men (5 double-strength centuries with 160 men each) 9 Cohors (with 6 centuries at 80 men each) for a total 4,320, and an additional 120 man cavalry for a grand total of 5,240 men not including all the officers. The basic designation of the 10 cohors was the same throughout all the Legions. They were arranged in battle so that the strongest and weakest units would be mixed throughout the formation maximizing moral and effectiveness Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hereticzero Posted November 25, 2012 Share Posted November 25, 2012 There is the prophet Jeremiah who claimed god never gave the law of sacrifice to Moses (Jer 5:31) (Jer 7:8) (Jer 7:22), which destroys the concept of Jesus as a sacrificial lamb (Hos_6:6). It is blasphemy to put words into god's mouth he never spoke (Romans Ch2), so if the Old Testament is true and without error, as Christians claim--Protestants and Catholics--, then the doctrinal principal of Jesus as a sacrifice cannot be true nor without error. The Pauline church, aka the Christian church, is teaching false biblical doctrine of salvation through grace, when none exists (The false-apostle Paul taught and bragged his own gospel, which is what the church teaches, not the gospel according to Jesus) because what god would demand a sacrifice of his son when he never gave such a law or commandment to man--the church's teaching principles, their doctrines, are based on the 'good news of Paul' and not Jesus' gospel. Paul is therefor a liar, or those who wrote in his name are liars. This also proves the OT writings were added to over a period of time to include the laws or commandments. The scribes lied, the prophets lied, and the priests rule by their own means. These traditions remain and the traditions of the church of Christianity are taught as if they were the commandments of god. The religion's own OT prophet destroyed Christianity before it was stolen from Judaism. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
falemon Posted November 25, 2012 Author Share Posted November 25, 2012 Ah yes, he is quite redundant isn't he Thanks for pointing that out. Well we should educate Christians with that, but only go as far as pointing out that it means no sacrifice was necessary. The only problem is that no matter how much people's eyes are opened to the lies they will find new ways to patch their belief, so it might be more important to adopt the biblical wisdom of focusing on reaching children in a viral nature. There are associated risks because we should not teach by indoctrination but instead equipping their minds to disseminate truth and information. For those who cannot and find it difficult to live without Xanity, then don't lose any sleep over it, a fact of life is that bad things can happen to good people too (mentioned in Ecclesiastes quite a lot), so there are many people who may not be saved :'( It's sad to think of it, but we mustn't let it get to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator Joshpantera Posted November 27, 2012 Moderator Share Posted November 27, 2012 ...onward non-Christian soldiers... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest r3alchild Posted February 24, 2013 Share Posted February 24, 2013 Amazing read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duderonomy Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 There is the prophet Jeremiah who claimed god never gave the law of sacrifice to Moses (Jer 5:31) (Jer 7:8) (Jer 7:22), which destroys the concept of Jesus as a sacrificial lamb (Hos_6:6). It is blasphemy to put words into god's mouth he never spoke (Romans Ch2), so if the Old Testament is true and without error, as Christians claim--Protestants and Catholics--, then the doctrinal principal of Jesus as a sacrifice cannot be true nor without error. The Pauline church, aka the Christian church, is teaching false biblical doctrine of salvation through grace, when none exists (The false-apostle Paul taught and bragged his own gospel, which is what the church teaches, not the gospel according to Jesus) because what god would demand a sacrifice of his son when he never gave such a law or commandment to man--the church's teaching principles, their doctrines, are based on the 'good news of Paul' and not Jesus' gospel. Paul is therefor a liar, or those who wrote in his name are liars. This also proves the OT writings were added to over a period of time to include the laws or commandments. The scribes lied, the prophets lied, and the priests rule by their own means. These traditions remain and the traditions of the church of Christianity are taught as if they were the commandments of god. The religion's own OT prophet destroyed Christianity before it was stolen from Judaism. HereticZero, I just read Jeremiah chapters 5 through 8 in the KJV and the NIV and I don't see anywhere in there where Jeremiah says that the law of sacrifice wasn't given to Moses, or anything similar. Really, I don't know where the law of sacrifice came from, but sacrifice to god was in the O.T. way before Moses or Jeremiah, as it goes back to Cain and Abel. Not a challenge or anything, but can you clarify? Did you quote from or did I read from the incorrect book? I really don't get what you are saying here. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest r3alchild Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 There is the prophet Jeremiah who claimed god never gave the law of sacrifice to Moses (Jer 5:31) (Jer 7:8) (Jer 7:22), which destroys the concept of Jesus as a sacrificial lamb (Hos_6:6). It is blasphemy to put words into god's mouth he never spoke (Romans Ch2), so if the Old Testament is true and without error, as Christians claim--Protestants and Catholics--, then the doctrinal principal of Jesus as a sacrifice cannot be true nor without error. The Pauline church, aka the Christian church, is teaching false biblical doctrine of salvation through grace, when none exists (The false-apostle Paul taught and bragged his own gospel, which is what the church teaches, not the gospel according to Jesus) because what god would demand a sacrifice of his son when he never gave such a law or commandment to man--the church's teaching principles, their doctrines, are based on the 'good news of Paul' and not Jesus' gospel. Paul is therefor a liar, or those who wrote in his name are liars. This also proves the OT writings were added to over a period of time to include the laws or commandments. The scribes lied, the prophets lied, and the priests rule by their own means. These traditions remain and the traditions of the church of Christianity are taught as if they were the commandments of god. The religion's own OT prophet destroyed Christianity before it was stolen from Judaism. I read jer 7 v 22 and it says something diffrent than what you where saying 22 For when I brought your ancestors out of Egypt and spoke to them, I did not just give them commands about burnt offerings and sacrifices, 23 but I gave them this command: Obey me, and I will be your God and you will be my people. Walk in obedience to all I command you, that it may go well with you. god or jeremiah was saying he did give them the law of sacrifice aswell as other things that the people didnt do. I also read the other jeremiah verses and I didnt see anything that suggestef god didnt insitute sacrifice. The other verses just said dont trust the words of the prophets but I doubt that means all the prophets of the bible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest r3alchild Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 Whoops looks like my post was covered. All is well, theres plenty of other bullshit in the bible too leave jesus for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hereticzero Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 There is the prophet Jeremiah who claimed god never gave the law of sacrifice to Moses (Jer 5:31) (Jer 7:8) (Jer 7:22), which destroys the concept of Jesus as a sacrificial lamb (Hos_6:6). It is blasphemy to put words into god's mouth he never spoke (Romans Ch2), so if the Old Testament is true and without error, as Christians claim--Protestants and Catholics--, then the doctrinal principal of Jesus as a sacrifice cannot be true nor without error. The Pauline church, aka the Christian church, is teaching false biblical doctrine of salvation through grace, when none exists (The false-apostle Paul taught and bragged his own gospel, which is what the church teaches, not the gospel according to Jesus) because what god would demand a sacrifice of his son when he never gave such a law or commandment to man--the church's teaching principles, their doctrines, are based on the 'good news of Paul' and not Jesus' gospel. Paul is therefor a liar, or those who wrote in his name are liars. This also proves the OT writings were added to over a period of time to include the laws or commandments. The scribes lied, the prophets lied, and the priests rule by their own means. These traditions remain and the traditions of the church of Christianity are taught as if they were the commandments of god. The religion's own OT prophet destroyed Christianity before it was stolen from Judaism. I read jer 7 v 22 and it says something diffrent than what you where saying 22 For when I brought your ancestors out of Egypt and spoke to them, I did not just give them commands about burnt offerings and sacrifices, 23 but I gave them this command: Obey me, and I will be your God and you will be my people. Walk in obedience to all I command you, that it may go well with you. god or jeremiah was saying he did give them the law of sacrifice aswell as other things that the people didnt do. I also read the other jeremiah verses and I didnt see anything that suggestef god didnt insitute sacrifice. The other verses just said dont trust the words of the prophets but I doubt that means all the prophets of the bible. What year is the reprint of your bible? The word 'just' does not appear in my translations. I use KJV 1611 and Modern KJV and they were published years ago, used in electronic bible tool. I have noticed stray words cropping up in newer translations, especially after 1984 pblications. The word 'just' also does not appear in the Interlinear Bible of Hebrew, Greek, and English published 1976 - 1983 eddition. I don't know what version of bible, year or publisher you use but all my editions claim god did not give the law of sacrifice to Moses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hereticzero Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 KJV 1611 edition: Jer 7:22 For I spake not vnto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices. Modern KJV: Jer 7:22 For I did not speak to your fathers, nor command them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices. 1965 Bible in Basic English: Jer 7:22 For I said nothing to your fathers, and gave them no orders, on the day when I took them out of Egypt, about burned offerings or offerings of beasts: Contemporary English Version: Jer 7:22 At the time I brought your ancestors out of Egypt, I didn't command them to offer sacrifices to me. (Bold added by me. This bible version states it plainly.) I am sticking to my assertions. The word 'just' changes the context of the verse. It was added at some point since 1983. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hereticzero Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 The Ten Commandments are the traditions of men taught as commandments. This means the law was not given to Moses and that the Ten Commandments and other laws supposedly given as laws from god, were not given and a concoction of the religion. this meme was carried over to the NT. Don't lean upon traditional teachings of the church that what they claim was actually given by god or that the original text claimed they were given by god. The bible has been rewritten on numerous occasions to bolster church doctrines, and not to present a clearer reading of the text. Christianity is a cut and paste religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hereticzero Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 duderonomy, on 24 Feb 2013 - 21:26, said: HereticZero, on 25 Nov 2012 - 15:22, said: There is the prophet Jeremiah who claimed god never gave the law of sacrifice to Moses (Jer 5:31) (Jer 7:8) (Jer 7:22), which destroys the concept of Jesus as a sacrificial lamb (Hos_6:6). It is blasphemy to put words into god's mouth he never spoke (Romans Ch2), so if the Old Testament is true and without error, as Christians claim--Protestants and Catholics--, then the doctrinal principal of Jesus as a sacrifice cannot be true nor without error. The Pauline church, aka the Christian church, is teaching false biblical doctrine of salvation through grace, when none exists (The false-apostle Paul taught and bragged his own gospel, which is what the church teaches, not the gospel according to Jesus) because what god would demand a sacrifice of his son when he never gave such a law or commandment to man--the church's teaching principles, their doctrines, are based on the 'good news of Paul' and not Jesus' gospel. Paul is therefor a liar, or those who wrote in his name are liars. This also proves the OT writings were added to over a period of time to include the laws or commandments. The scribes lied, the prophets lied, and the priests rule by their own means. These traditions remain and the traditions of the church of Christianity are taught as if they were the commandments of god. The religion's own OT prophet destroyed Christianity before it was stolen from Judaism. HereticZero, I just read Jeremiah chapters 5 through 8 in the KJV and the NIV and I don't see anywhere in there where Jeremiah says that the law of sacrifice wasn't given to Moses, or anything similar. Really, I don't know where the law of sacrifice came from, but sacrifice to god was in the O.T. way before Moses or Jeremiah, as it goes back to Cain and Abel. Not a challenge or anything, but can you clarify? Did you quote from or did I read from the incorrect book? I really don't get what you are saying here. Thanks Any culture or person can sacrifice to any god they choose, this does not indicate a religious law existed to do so even if it were done in the OT, it was a 'tradition of men' not given by god as law but given as law by the priests, scribes who were liars of their own religion. There also exists no proof Moses was a real historical figure, like Jesus they exist only in religious texts. And Exodus is also not an historical event. The OT is a collection of mythological beliefs written by people who actually believed in unicornes, cockatrices, talking snakes, fauns, and satyrs -- Greek mythology incorporated in Hebrew religion--many early peoples believed in such creatures abounded in the mid east. Christians have taken the books and wrote out the names of mythological animals replacing them with names of scientifically known animals in order to conceal the fact their bible is a collection of mythology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest r3alchild Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 Lol the niv is the only true bible translation, since it approves of how I think of god and it say exactly what I need it to say to dissprove you. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts