What is the best evidence against Christianity
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
30-11-2016, 09:13 PM (This post was last modified: 01-12-2016 05:24 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: What is the best evidence against Christianity
There is no reason (and no support given) to think that Jesus (if he existed) predicted the destruction of the temple. It was never a part of Jewish messianism. In fact Acts says the followers thought that he was about to restore the Kingdom, (which he and Paul thought would happen in their own lifetimes. Then it didn't.)

Acts 1:6 "Then they gathered around him and asked him, 'Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?' "

And ever since nothing happened that they all thought would happen, believers have been cooking up excuses for why it didn't and cooking up other meanings for it.

Luke 21: 20 -> lists the things they thought would happen. No temple destruction listed.
(Actually it's very odd ... if they *did* think it was the end-times, and he said they did, why in fact did they stay in Jerusalem ? Doh Facepalm )

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-11-2016, 10:07 PM
RE: What is the best evidence against Christianity
(30-11-2016 08:34 PM)dancefortwo Wrote:  
(30-11-2016 04:49 PM)Aractus Wrote:  Well there are a few main versions, but yes there are thousands if not millions of individually held theologies. But it doesn't alter the fact that early Christianity is based on a shared mythology, and that Christianity today is based on a shared mythology.


Yes I've already made that point in this thread.


Well you would know that there is no agreement over much of the gospel content. What there is wide agreement on is that:

1. Jesus of Nazereth was a historical person.
2. He was baptised by John.
3. He preformed healings, exorcisms, and gave teachings.
4. He called disciples.
5. He was crucified by the Romans under Pontius Pilate.

And as I've noted there are a few specific events that are considered historical in addition like the disruption in the temple and the rejection at Nazareth.


Although I do like to point out the fact that the Resurrection is not in Mark, he still knows about it which is very clear from the passages that are in Mark like this:

Mark 16:6-7: And he said to them, “Do not be alarmed. You seek Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He has risen; he is not here. See the place where they laid him. But go, tell his disciples and Peter that he is going before you to Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you.”

So your assertion that the mythology didn't exist yet is false. Secondly we can't determine that Mark was written after the destruction of Jerusalem, because I'm willing to say that Jesus did predict the siege. I'd agree that 70-75 AD is the most likely date for the gospel, but we can't rule out an earlier date based purely on the fact that Jesus couldn't have predicted the siege of Jerusalem. That was an easy prediction, all he had to do was remember the past and predict it would happen again.


Well there is - the Last Supper appears in Corinthians before any of the gospels are written.

Allrighty then, here we go again..... Aractus and Bucky Ball......

[Image: giphy.gif]

I called it!!

Check out my now-defunct atheism blog. It's just a blog, no ads, no revenue, no gods.
----
Atheism promotes critical thinking; theism promotes hypocritical thinking. -- Me
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-12-2016, 09:24 PM
RE: What is the best evidence against Christianity
(29-11-2016 08:27 PM)Aractus Wrote:  
(29-11-2016 07:18 PM)Loom Wrote:  Who says Jesus was an actual person? It's highly debatable that he ever existed even as some regular no-magic guy.

No it isn't, and if you use the mythicist argument with Christians they have every right not to listen to anything else you say. There is however wide scholarly agreement that Moses was not a historical person, and that is a major problem for Christianity. Without Moses there's no covenant with Jehovah that believers were unable to keep that forms the necessity for Jesus to come and replace it with the "New Covenant".

Sure, they have every right to stick their fingers in their ears and go "la, la, la, la, la, ..."

There is no good evidence for the existence of the Jesus of the Bible.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-12-2016, 09:31 PM
RE: What is the best evidence against Christianity
(30-11-2016 09:06 AM)Aractus Wrote:  ... it simply means they believe in their theology.

Belief in that theology is the very essence of gullibility.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-12-2016, 10:59 PM
RE: What is the best evidence against Christianity
(30-11-2016 06:50 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  No references. No support. One cannot claim concesus without EVIDENCE.
In light of past egregious errors, nothing some people assert is considered trustworthy.

Where is your evidence I'm wrong about it?

Quote:Laugh out load
THAT is EXACTLY the portion that was missing.

You're a fucking idiot. I quoted this part (emphasis added):

Quote:"Mark 16 is the final chapter of the Gospel of Mark in the New Testament of the Christian Bible. It begins with the discovery of the empty tomb by Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome. There they encounter a man dressed in white who announces the Resurrection of Jesus (16:1-6).

It isn't "missing". Even if it were, it's not the only thing. There's Mark 8:31, Mark 9:31, Mark 14:58, and Mark 15:29. It is as clear as anything that the Gospel writer knows the physical resurrection myth, he just didn't include it because it wasn't important to him. Compare that though to Paul, and you'll find nothing that talks about the "three days and three nights" or the personal visitations by Jesus, or anything that is clearly linked to the physical resurrection myth. With the single exception of 1 Corinthians 15:4. For that reason I agree that Mark is written after the last Pauline epistle, and almost certainly after Paul has died. It could have been written around 66AD at the earliest.

My Blog
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-12-2016, 11:22 PM (This post was last modified: 01-12-2016 11:25 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: What is the best evidence against Christianity
Quote:Where is your evidence I'm wrong about it?

So you got nothing.
The fool that didn't know about the Gnostic influence in John and refused to even look at any of the hundreds (or thousands) of scholarly articles refuting him gets to say nothing without evidence.

Quote: ... he just didn't include it because it wasn't important to him.

LMAO. A man rises from the dead for the first time in human history, "and it just isn't important". LOL Now THAT makes *perfect sense*. Facepalm
You have no clue what was important to the writer. You make up shit and present it as truth.

Quote:Compare that though to Paul, and you'll find nothing that talks about the "three days and three nights" or the personal visitations by Jesus, or anything that is clearly linked to the physical resurrection myth. With the single exception of 1 Corinthians 15:4. For that reason I agree that Mark is written after the last Pauline epistle, and almost certainly after Paul has died. It could have been written around 66AD at the earliest.

Yet no reason AT ALL offered for the asserted dating opinion. Your pompous assertions are worthless. No one cares what you "agree" about. Your opinion has no weight. Mark knows the temple was destroyed, and you have offered NOT ONE reason to explain how or why that could be. Just asserted your unsupported opinion.
It could not have been written before 72.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
02-12-2016, 01:34 AM
RE: What is the best evidence against Christianity
(01-12-2016 10:59 PM)Aractus Wrote:  You're a fucking idiot. [...]

Wow... that's sure a convincing argument LOL.

BTW Aractus, why are you avoiding addressing my question—on two occasions? I only ask because of your pendantry regarding the finer points of scripture.

(01-12-2016 10:59 PM)Aractus Wrote:  More broadly there is agreement he delivered teachings, performed healings, and called disciples as well. [...]

There is no extant evidence that the man called Jesus performed any clinical-type "healings". What evidence do you personally draw upon to agree with the assertion that he really did heal people? Or are you relying solely on yet another doubtful bit of hearsay in the bible?

On the other hand, if you don't personally believe this man performed healings, can you elaborate on the people who do, and who are in broad agreement that he did?

I'm a creationist... I believe that man created God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-12-2016, 07:55 AM
RE: What is the best evidence against Christianity
(29-11-2016 02:23 PM)Ask21771 Wrote:  I mean what is the best evidence it's wrong

You are asking a very general question but i will try to be specific.

Generally all Christian religions believe in Jesus as a real historical character.
A basic google search will show you that there might be a historical charismatic rabbi from that time, but none of the miracle god claims has any proof.

That said, most church dogma breaks down to this.

One day a Lawyer asked Jesus what the most important Law was.
Sadly, as the story goes, Jesus said there were 2 not 1.

Love God with your whole heart, soul, strength and mind

And your neighbor as yourself.

ALL LAWS ARE BASED ON THESE - Jesus (unknown)

This is why you have Firebrand "GOD SAID IT" Christians and Diplomatic "Just Love Everyone" Christians

Since we can prove that the Golden Rule, is of human origin, that only leaves religious types to prove that whole commitment to God is not only true but right.

And if they wish to argue that submission to God is ALL, then they should recall that the Arabic word for Submission to God is...Islam.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-12-2016, 08:17 AM
RE: What is the best evidence against Christianity
Didn't read all the replies.......

But it seems to me the best evidence against Christianity, is Christians........


Seriously -- have you met any of these assholes???????

[Image: phelpscollagewithoutshadow2a.jpg]

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes onlinebiker's post
28-12-2016, 08:54 AM
RE: What is the best evidence against Christianity
(29-11-2016 04:11 PM)Ask21771 Wrote:  Then why do biblical scholars believe the empty tomb was true

Likely because many atheists here think in terms of belief and lack of belief, rather in terms of most likely explanations, which historians and scholars often do.

A historian would look at the available resources/data, and draw the most likely explanation for it. Such as looking at the available resources and asking whether it's more likely that there was a historical Jesus, that gave rise to the Christian movement or not.

Atheists here on the other hand, like to start with thinking whether or not the data and resources available constitute as evidence, primarily by deciding how well the term translates from fields like biology into history. If they decide it doesn't constitute as evidence, rather than explaining it, they appeal to a lack of belief.

Their counter positions on the resurrection, historicity, is not an alternative explanation, but rather an appeal to lack of belief, such as is the case against the existence of God in general.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: