Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
10-06-2013, 12:26 PM
RE: Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New
Many things from the Old Testament are reaffirmed in the New Testament...

Matthew:
"5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."

^ While Christians often say that the fulfillment was Jesus' sacrifice, there is absolutely nothing to suggest that within the Bible itself.

"5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. 5:29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. 5:30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. "

^ Sounds like Jesus is suggesting bodily mutilation as a cure for sin.

"10:14 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet. 10:15 Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city."

^ If you don't receive our missionaries and convert, your city will be burned to the ground and all the people killed.

Romans:
"1:29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, 1:30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 1:31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: 1:32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them. "

^ So, Deuteronomy is still valid apparently.

Corinthians:
"10:8 Neither let us commit fornication, as some of them committed, and fell in one day three and twenty thousand."

^ Prostitution or sex before marriage is cause for death.

Hebrews:
Quite a ramble so I don't want to post it, but the general lesson is that blood sacrifices please God.

If something can be destroyed by the truth, it might be worth destroying.

[Image: ZcC2kGl.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Elesjei's post
10-06-2013, 12:30 PM (This post was last modified: 10-06-2013 03:49 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New
The fig tree thingy was made up as one of the symmetrical "chiasms" that Richard Carrier talks about. The literary construction of the gospels is very complex, and very deliberate, (myth-making). It's fascinating to see the graphs/charts lined up, and see what was juxtaposed against what. Carrier's literary analysis of ancient myth systems is brilliant.
Jump ahead, to about 26:00. The beginning is boring.



Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
10-06-2013, 05:01 PM
RE: Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New
Realize, first, that all those letters that make up the bulk of it aren't written by anyone who supposedly knew jesus - they're almost all admitted to be Saul's interpretations. Therefore, they hold roughly as much weight as me writing to Jim in Tulsa about what I think.

Second, read revelations. Preferrably while sober. Try to take it the least bit seriously.

Third, take just the four gospels. Put them side by side. Two don't mention jesus's birth, two do - and those two accounts vary drastically. (While you're at it, realize the romans were meticulous record keepers, and there's zero record of a "census" that 'required every man to go to his home' or whatever the wording was - and it would be the single most disruptive, ridiculous request anyone could make. Just the trade disruption would be reason for the regimented Romans not to want to do it.) And the time of the various things being described... doesn't match up. Then go to the crucifixion and resurrection and look at the glaring inconsistencies between them. Not to mention the utter lack of evidence of things like earthquakes - or something else that would be very notable, the dead rising and preaching to an entire city. If the "veil" in the Jewish temple were "rent," it would be a huge theological event for them, and likely one passed down... no mention of it.

Keep going through and you find inconsistency after inconsistency.

There's simply not any more reason to believe the NT was anything more than the propaganda of a small cult, either.

My little rambling blog. (More topical than this one, at least.)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-06-2013, 05:21 PM
RE: Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New
OK. Counterexample time.

The OT is merely primitive and savage, but it represents an advance over other religions in the same part of the world.

The NT is sophisticated diabolism.

The OT leads people away from the idea of human sacrifice.

The NT brings it back as a central characteristic of the universe.

Nonsense is nonsense, but the history of nonsense is a very important science.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-06-2013, 05:30 PM
RE: Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New
(04-06-2013 10:07 AM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(04-06-2013 09:22 AM)theword Wrote:  Prove your claim.

Technically it's the person making the positive claim that has burden of proof but since my guess is you're either very young (I'm thinking early teens considering your single sentence responses) or just uneducated (considering your political views) I will go ahead and give you a basic primer on why what you believe is nothing but Roman propaganda. I will not be adding citations until I see a response from you because I imagine I am just wasting my time with a troll.

Lets start with the birth shall we. Away in a manger in Bethlehem except of course they weren't. That story about a census under Augustus is complete fiction and we have Roman records (and they were very thorough about such things) to show that the closest census didn't happen until sometime in 15 Ce some 20 years past when most scholars place the supposed birth of "Jesus" (we will get to the quotes here in a min) so they would never have been in Bethlehem, which of course the author only put them there to fulfill a misread prophecy that had nothing to do with that town the NT is full of stuff like that it's a wonder if any of the Authors ever even read the Hebrew Bible.

So there goes the Christmas play and the wise men and the star (all borrowed btw from Mithraism and other local religions at the time) now onto the name Jesus. That of course is a bastardization of Ieus from the Greek which in turn is from the Hebrew Yeshua. Christ is something added by Paul in the latter part of the 1st century Ce but we will leave Paul alone as he is worthy of an entire work up alone (as a side note you don't actually follow Christianity so much as Paulanity considering he is credited with a good chunk of the NT) so the name you are supposedly praying in has been wrong this entire time. Hmm considering how capricious Yahweh is and how he hates idols it is a wonder he would ever set another to receive his praise.

So now your school play and even the name you're using is wrong, well damn what's next you gonna tell me Nazareth wasn't a real place. Bingo at least not in the early 1st century Ce. Nazareth has no records from any earlier than 50 Ce almost 20 years past when Yeshua was crucified supposedly. So Jesus of Nazareth is wrong on all counts. Biblical scholars now believe that was another bastardization of the cult the Nazarene a Coptic Gnostic variant of Judaism. As a side note you said Jesus loves us well probably not unless you were Jewish the Nazarene were a particularly nationalistic sect and did not care for gentiles in the least. So the real life Yeshua would probably despise you as an unclean outsider.

Lastly (for now there is so much more than this but really for 1 post this is enough) the star moment the Crucifixion. The story goes it was because of the Jews and his disruption of the temple. The trial and Pilot washing his hands and all that Shakespearean drama. All of it is of course fantasy crucifixion was a reserved punishment for rabble rousers and insurgents. It was Romes way of humiliating you and torturing you slowly. Firstly the nails through the hands thing is fake that was a medieval invention. It was through the wrists that you were nailed up as the hands cannot support the entire weight of the body. Next you were stripped naked as part of the punishment, though I can imagine why the church has decided to cover up that little detail. Lastly if as they claim Yeshua would have been done in by "The Jews" he would have been stoned as that was the proscribed punishment of Judea not Crucifixion which was entirely Roman.

So Yeshua was killed not for you sins cause he loves you but because he was a Jewish nationalist who hated gentiles and was trying to cause a revolt against Rome.

This was me (an atheist) criticizing the NT.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-06-2013, 05:42 PM
RE: Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New
I'll give a few NT versus:

Matthew 7:21 - Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
Matthew 6:34 - Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.
Matthew 10:34 - Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
Matthew 24:34 - Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
Luke 19:27 - But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.
Romans 16:17 - Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
2 John 1:10 - If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:
Colossians 2:8 - Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
2 Corinthians 6:14 - Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness?
Romans 12:19 - Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.

Greetings carbon-based bipeds. - Arthur Clarke
The stars died so you could be here today. - Lawrence Krauss
Mathematics is the language of nature. - Lawrence Krauss
I care to live only to entice people to look at Nature's loveliness. - John Muir
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-06-2013, 07:20 PM (This post was last modified: 10-06-2013 07:44 PM by ridethespiral.)
RE: Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New
Sure there isn't as much fodder as in the old testament, those books are just so chock full of fun... Others have done a good job pointing out that there is still plenty of questionable material coming out of the mouth of the 'loving and just god' but regardless of it's content I can most certainly refute it's origins and alleged divinity...

The new testament is a series of contradictory tails, rife with omissions, written over the span of decades and started almost 100 years after the events described in it supposedly take place and then translated and revised ad nauseum. The miracles and characteristics prescribed unto Jesus where typical of a whole slew of other deities and figures (from Horas to Hercules) http://listverse.com/2009/04/13/10-chris...te-jesus/. Jesus is little more than an allegorical sun god who's life story parallels the path of the sun in the sky, from birth to death to re-birth. What you didn't think all the Christian holidays correspond with the pagan astrological celebrations by chance did you? Silly christian you are just a sun worshiper, like all those other heathens, except they cheated you out of your Easter orgy and made you sit in church instead. The Easter bunny and all those eggs...Pagan symbols of fertility. Wake up, you are eating chocolate caricatures of natures horniest mammal and painting chicken ovum.

It is little more than a thinly veiled attempt to inject the eastern philosophies (making their way west at the time) into Judaism via the literary fulfillment of Hebrew prophecy in a time when upstart designer religions where all the rage in the Roman empire. It would have been washed away in the tides of history had not Constantine embraced it for it's usefulness as a tool of the state.

Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-06-2013, 08:03 PM
RE: Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New
I actually criticize the New Testament alot, from its contradictions in the Easter Story, to the story in Mark of Jesus telling the pharisees that eating with dirty hands is fine, to Jesus' biased lessons. Practically every time I post a new thread it's about another nugget of poor logic I've found within the NT.

While the Old Testament is certainly an easy target, the New Testament is quite flawed as well. But one of the main reasons that atheists still heap criticism upon the Old Testament is because Christians haven't disavowed the OT, removed it from their bibles, or officially declared it to be no longer part of their religion. And when it's convenient (such as in the gay marriage debate) they still quote it. And of course Jesus declared that the OT was still viable and important... all of it.

So... what's your point?

My girlfriend is mad at me. Perhaps I shouldn't have tried cooking a stick in her non-stick pan.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Starcrash's post
10-06-2013, 08:22 PM
RE: 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.

"I have noticed that most of the criticisms atheists does are only on the Old Testament."
"atheists does": I think you mean "atheist have".
I think that you are referring to the fact that many Christians are uncomfortable with the "Old Testament", because it is so easily refuted and so difficult to defend. Why, for instance, was it O.K. when it was written to own and abuse slaves? So, you feel that you can wish the "Old Testament" away, because The New Testament basically nullified it. And you feel that atheist can't refute the "New Testament" for some reason, which I have never understood. Well, there are lots of books for you to read. The very idea that Jesus existed is in question. You say that: "Jesus was a symbol of grace and mercy". Well, that leads you to some questions: Was Jesus a symbol? In other words was he real? But that's not enough You have to prove, not only that he was real, but that the stories that are told about him are true! Also: The idea that what is moral and what is not, changed between one era and another is simply ridiculous! How ditzy was god?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-06-2013, 10:36 PM
RE: Atheists can only criticize the Old Testament but not the New



[/quote]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Raptor Jesus's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: