Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-06-2013, 11:35 PM
Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New
I have noticed that most of the criticisms atheists does are only on the Old Testament. I can only count a few criticisms against the New Testament. Always, a Christian would say that Jesus was a symbol of grace and mercy that is why his harsh punishments have already changed in the NT. And that is their biggest argument. Some would also say that it's affected too by the culture in the old times. Today, it's no longer applicable that's why we don't obey anymore the harsh treatments to women, children etc like stoning to death, beating and the likes.

So if you were to critic the NT, how would you "burn" it and the Christians who defend it?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-06-2013, 11:36 PM
RE: Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New
Buckminster Fullerene, you insufferable bastard, I think this question is for you Wink
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-06-2013, 11:40 PM
RE: Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New
... Bertrand Russell wrote a very good essay about why Jesus himself was a bit of a dick. It's called 'Why I am not a Christian'.. Look at the section titled "The Character of Christ".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like morondog's post
09-06-2013, 11:46 PM
RE: Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New
Matthew 5:17
"Don't misunderstand why I have come. I did not come to abolish the law of Moses or the writings of the prophets. No, I came to accomplish their purpose." ~Jesus Christ

BAM!!! Jesus loved all the "harsh treatments to women, children etc like stoning to death, beating and the likes", and don't forget the child rape and murder.

Arguments against the old testament are still applicable after Jesus.
Done...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like Raptor Jesus's post
10-06-2013, 12:41 AM
RE: Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New
How should I treat and beat my slaves? I'll just ask Jesus, he knows the truth!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like LadyJane's post
10-06-2013, 12:47 AM
RE: Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New
I dismiss the new testament.


Wind's in the east, a mist coming in
Like something is brewing and about to begin
Can't put my finger on what lies in store
but I feel what's to happen has happened before...


Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Momsurroundedbyboys's post
10-06-2013, 12:54 AM
RE: Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New
Jesus also says to bring him all non-believers and to kill them in front of him. It's like jihad, but from Jesus.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Raptor Jesus's post
10-06-2013, 02:21 AM (This post was last modified: 11-06-2013 07:56 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New
(09-06-2013 11:35 PM)GuiltyAngel Wrote:  I have noticed that most of the criticisms atheists does are only on the Old Testament. I can only count a few criticisms against the New Testament. Always, a Christian would say that Jesus was a symbol of grace and mercy that is why his harsh punishments have already changed in the NT. And that is their biggest argument. Some would also say that it's affected too by the culture in the old times. Today, it's no longer applicable that's why we don't obey anymore the harsh treatments to women, children etc like stoning to death, beating and the likes.

So if you were to critic the NT, how would you "burn" it and the Christians who defend it?

(09-06-2013 11:36 PM)morondog Wrote:  Buckminster Fullerene, you insufferable bastard, I think this question is for you Wink

Generalizing about "atheists" is just stupidity. "They do this and they do that". Show me the peer-reviewed poll data, or STFU.
The premise is false, and quite screwed up actually. He equated Jebus with Yahweh. Couldn't be more wrong. Jebus is not a "god", in the NT until the idea became fully formed much later. They argued about it for centuries in the councils, and the various parts of the church in no way agreed on it's meaning. Jesus is not Yahweh. He never claimed to be. It was unthinkable. The NT is just as easily criticized, maybe for other reasons.
1. If there were a deity, it would be unchanging/timeless. A "change" refutes any "eternal" god. (As does a "sacrificial death" It means the god is subject to a temporal dimension, thus not it's creator). It means the god fundamentally looked at humans in a different way after "the price was paid". That ain't no "eternal, unchanging" deity.
2. It's just made up nonsense. Jebus said he did not come to destroy the (old) law, but to fulfill it. "not a jot or tittle ... bla bla bla".
3. It's simply capriciousness, used as a convenience when it's convenient.
The parts of the "old law" they wanted to keep,, they kept, *some of the time*.
Saul of Tarsus said they were freed from the old law, (as he was the founder of the religion Christians really practice, ...ie Paulianity). When Saul wanted to keep women quiet, and subservient, and others "in their place", he quoted the old law. When he wanted to be free of it, he cooked up something else.
4. The New Testament is just as much bullshit as the Old. It's built on a fundamentally, (or actually *interpreted today* with flawed understanding of the Hebrew nature of evil (vs *chaos*), but since that's a little more "obtuse", it's easier to throw rocks at the OT, than the NT, but Yahweh is the same deity. HE is the one who acts differently. Did YAHWEH get saved ? Hahaha. Nope. The HUMAN concept of a god evolved, just as it continues to today. Actually it evolves right before our eyes with Paulianity. The Hebrews NEVER would have cooked up a "divine" being, *co-equal" to Yahweh. That would have been blasphemy. To them a "son of god" in NO WAY meant an equal, (trinitarian) understanding. In the gospels, the concept of *divinity* is different in each, depending which one is being read. Even Jews today LAUGH at the *trinity*. Do the gospels say Jebus "raised himself" ? No. They say he was raised by the Father. There is a fundamental INEQUALITY presumed. There is no "original sin" (or even immortality), in the OT. Augustine, Jerome, Saul and Aquinas cooked up "original sin". Saul of Tarsus believed they were already in a risen state, and that ONLY the saved had eternal life. So the fact that it's criticized less does not mean the NT is any less full of nonsense. Actually Mark Fulton is much more versed on the NT than I. Hopefully he will weigh in.

It's also false that only "atheists" talk about the evolution in human ideas of the concept of a deity, and what it's attributes were. (See Karen Armstrong's "A History of God"). They (the attributes) changed as culture changed. When the Hebrews needed a war god, Yahweh was just that. When they had been soundly defeated a few times, not so much. THAT is what changed. NOT that Jebus was more cuddly and nice. Human political society had become more stable in the Near East, (relatively), and Yahweh had proven to be powerless to protect his *chosen* people. The enemies were the large states, not the neighboring city.
Mark and I and many other here have criticized the nonsense of the age of Paulianity just as much as we have the more ancient junk.

That's all the "insufferable" shit I gots for today. But it comes naturally, so there will be more tomorrow. Tongue

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein Certified Ancient Astronaut Theorist
Isaiah 45:7 "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things" (KJV)

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 8 users Like Bucky Ball's post
10-06-2013, 04:44 AM
RE: Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New
Jesus was an arrogant dickhead. Jesus is hardly important whatsoever, it's just a name with a bunch of fariytales attached to it. The easiest way to criticize both testaments is the fact that it was written several thousands of years ago and the shit that's in it is outdated in every way. Christians can shut up and just accept the IPhone as their new god.

They came, they saw and acknowledged
Some good, some bad
Opinion: Dangerous
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ELK12695's post
10-06-2013, 06:52 AM (This post was last modified: 10-06-2013 07:04 AM by Reltzik.)
RE: Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New
(09-06-2013 11:35 PM)GuiltyAngel Wrote:  I have noticed that most of the criticisms atheists does are only on the Old Testament. I can only count a few criticisms against the New Testament. Always, a Christian would say that Jesus was a symbol of grace and mercy that is why his harsh punishments have already changed in the NT. And that is their biggest argument. Some would also say that it's affected too by the culture in the old times. Today, it's no longer applicable that's why we don't obey anymore the harsh treatments to women, children etc like stoning to death, beating and the likes.

So if you were to critic the NT, how would you "burn" it and the Christians who defend it?

In addition to what everyone else said, let me add that the primary criticism to the OT also applies to the NT:

"Oh, be still our collective hearts, MORE tall tales suffering from serious logical holes-" (just as one example, why would an omnipotent god require a son's sacrifice, rather than just a wave of the hand, to implement salvation? If that wasn't required, wouldn't that make the sacrifice pointless?) "- several places that outright defy our understanding of how the universe works, no verifiable proof to persuade us these radical deviations are correct, inconsistencies with the historical record, predictive claims that didn't pan out-" (HOW many generations until the second coming?) "- a chain of custody of the accounts that is highly suspect, and all around persuasive capacity residing somewhere between zip and nada. Oh, and a bunch of hateful people hating our guts for having any skepticism at all and not instantly buying into it like the world's most gullible marks discovered by a Three Card Monty shark."

EDIT: "Oh, and they want our money and our votes."

"If I ignore the alternatives, the only option is God; I ignore them; therefore God." -- The Syllogism of Fail
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: