Proof How Your Religion Could Be Made Up

[hadit]

Organized religions claim god visiting is a historical fact. That's not just taking the position they BELIEVE.

whether or not Jesus existed on earth is a question of historical fact......whether he is God incarnate is a question of belief.......

Its questionable. No one from his day wrote about him while he was living. No record of his crucifixion in roman records. Its all hearsay.

it's no more hearsay than for example, the American Revolution...everything we know about that was also written by people who experienced it......

If the person who penned Luke didn't see what Luke was claiming then its hearsay right from the start. Show me Luke wrote Luke. He probably didn't even know how to write. The bibles were written over hundreds of years.

d'uh.....the various books of the Bible were written over hundreds of years....Genesis and Revelation where not written at the same time....BRILLIG!.......Luke was a contemporary of Jesus Christ.....did the people who wrote about the American Revolution experience every single event that occurred in 1776?........the gospels are communicating something to you about Jesus......you think its about who he had lunch with on Thursday after Passover......that is no more essential than knowing what color Paul Revere's horse was, to understand the American Revolution......

This actually is an extremely important point, as atheists inevitably ignore the message of the Bible and instead focus on the tiniest of details.

 

[hadit]

Most scholars agree, following what is known as the "Marcan hypothesis",that the authors of Matthew and Luke used Mark as a source when writing their gospels after the Gospel of Mark was completed (written 60-75 CE)

actually most scholars agree that Matthew wrote Matthew, Mark wrote Mark and Luke wrote Luke.....given that all three knew each other and that all three gospels were set down in writing after twenty years of shared oral tradition it would be more amazing if there were NOT similarities......

Show me most scholars agree with you that mark Luke and Matt penned their own books.

lol.....you've been flapping your lips about "most scholars" here for months and have never provided any documentation of it.....now you think its important?......the gospel of Luke has had Luke's name on it ever since he handed the first copy of it to his followers.......I give you four billion scholars over two thousand years.....what do you have?....a half dozen atheists since 1936?.......

Sometimes the authors wrote in first person sometimes not. Where are the shrines or urns that hold the remains of these papyrus books? Where is Luke mark and Paul's graves? Hell where is Jesus' grave site? Your religions history is sketchy. So are the writings. Now go ask your preacher who wrote the bibles.

Luke and his manuscript are now only dust......Jesus is not.....THAT is what you should have learned from the gospel written by Luke......

He also wrote the book of Acts, recording the history of the early Church.

 

[hadit]

It is theism that doesnt exist if you are claiming to know god exists.

I BELIEVE in God......atheists BELIEVE there are no gods......however, they pretend they conclude this rationally.....that is what marks them as irrational......

Organized religions claim god visiting is a historical fact. That's not just taking the position they BELIEVE.

whether or not Jesus existed on earth is a question of historical fact......whether he is God incarnate is a question of belief.......

Its questionable. No one from his day wrote about him while he was living. No record of his crucifixion in roman records. Its all hearsay.

I'm not going to trust ancient fairytales. Joseph smith moses and Mohammad were real people too. Well Mohammad and Joe smith were. Moses not so sure. They say he existed 3600 to 2500 years ago. Pretty big window to say the guy really lived at one time. Sounds like a story to me. Like Adam and Noah and Abraham and jonah. If none of them are real maybe neither is Jesus. Why didn't the Jews convert then? They saw it. Go ahead explain away.

You ask why the Jews didn't convert while simultaneously claiming a knowledge of the Scriptures?

 

[sealybobo]

Organized religions claim god visiting is a historical fact. That's not just taking the position they BELIEVE.

whether or not Jesus existed on earth is a question of historical fact......whether he is God incarnate is a question of belief.......

Its questionable. No one from his day wrote about him while he was living. No record of his crucifixion in roman records. Its all hearsay.

it's no more hearsay than for example, the American Revolution...everything we know about that was also written by people who experienced it......

If the person who penned Luke didn't see what Luke was claiming then its hearsay right from the start. Show me Luke wrote Luke. He probably didn't even know how to write. The bibles were written over hundreds of years.

d'uh.....the various books of the Bible were written over hundreds of years....Genesis and Revelation where not written at the same time....BRILLIG!.......Luke was a contemporary of Jesus Christ.....did the people who wrote about the American Revolution experience every single event that occurred in 1776?........the gospels are communicating something to you about Jesus......you think its about who he had lunch with on Thursday after Passover......that is no more essential than knowing what color Paul Revere's horse was, to understand the American Revolution......

In other words I'm missing the message of being good? I got that. But I also see how much bad that book can get people to do. It says a lot of things. Overall I'm not a fan of the bibles unless were talking about it as a fictional book then its brilliant.

Remember wells got you all to believe we were being invaded by marcians? Dummies.

 

[sealybobo]

Most scholars agree, following what is known as the "Marcan hypothesis",that the authors of Matthew and Luke used Mark as a source when writing their gospels after the Gospel of Mark was completed (written 60-75 CE)

actually most scholars agree that Matthew wrote Matthew, Mark wrote Mark and Luke wrote Luke.....given that all three knew each other and that all three gospels were set down in writing after twenty years of shared oral tradition it would be more amazing if there were NOT similarities......

Absolutely there should be similarities. Ask 3 different people to describe an event they all witnessed, and you'll get three different stories with strong similarities but different perspectives and focus.

Or one wrote it first and the other 2 read it then plagerized

 

[hadit]

whether or not Jesus existed on earth is a question of historical fact......whether he is God incarnate is a question of belief.......

Its questionable. No one from his day wrote about him while he was living. No record of his crucifixion in roman records. Its all hearsay.

it's no more hearsay than for example, the American Revolution...everything we know about that was also written by people who experienced it......

If the person who penned Luke didn't see what Luke was claiming then its hearsay right from the start. Show me Luke wrote Luke. He probably didn't even know how to write. The bibles were written over hundreds of years.

d'uh.....the various books of the Bible were written over hundreds of years....Genesis and Revelation where not written at the same time....BRILLIG!.......Luke was a contemporary of Jesus Christ.....did the people who wrote about the American Revolution experience every single event that occurred in 1776?........the gospels are communicating something to you about Jesus......you think its about who he had lunch with on Thursday after Passover......that is no more essential than knowing what color Paul Revere's horse was, to understand the American Revolution......

In other words I'm missing the message of being good? I got that. But I also see how much bad that book can get people to do. It says a lot of things. Overall I'm not a fan of the bibles unless were talking about it as a fictional book then its brilliant.

Remember wells got you all to believe we were being invaded by marcians? Dummies.

If that's what you think the Bible is about, you have no knowledge of it at all, and your argument is suspect from the beginning.

 

[PostmodernProph]

whether or not Jesus existed on earth is a question of historical fact......whether he is God incarnate is a question of belief.......

Its questionable. No one from his day wrote about him while he was living. No record of his crucifixion in roman records. Its all hearsay.

it's no more hearsay than for example, the American Revolution...everything we know about that was also written by people who experienced it......

If the person who penned Luke didn't see what Luke was claiming then its hearsay right from the start. Show me Luke wrote Luke. He probably didn't even know how to write. The bibles were written over hundreds of years.

d'uh.....the various books of the Bible were written over hundreds of years....Genesis and Revelation where not written at the same time....BRILLIG!.......Luke was a contemporary of Jesus Christ.....did the people who wrote about the American Revolution experience every single event that occurred in 1776?........the gospels are communicating something to you about Jesus......you think its about who he had lunch with on Thursday after Passover......that is no more essential than knowing what color Paul Revere's horse was, to understand the American Revolution......

In other words I'm missing the message of being good?

no.....the message of Luke.....I'm sure your father can explain it to you if only you stop telling him what he believes and start listening.....

 

[PostmodernProph]

Most scholars agree, following what is known as the "Marcan hypothesis",that the authors of Matthew and Luke used Mark as a source when writing their gospels after the Gospel of Mark was completed (written 60-75 CE)

actually most scholars agree that Matthew wrote Matthew, Mark wrote Mark and Luke wrote Luke.....given that all three knew each other and that all three gospels were set down in writing after twenty years of shared oral tradition it would be more amazing if there were NOT similarities......

Absolutely there should be similarities. Ask 3 different people to describe an event they all witnessed, and you'll get three different stories with strong similarities but different perspectives and focus.

Or one wrote it first and the other 2 read it then plagerized

that would be the 1936 atheist' interpretation.......

 

[sealybobo]

I mean whoever in the future that wrote the first bible because it wasn't Luke or Paul who authored or penned those books. Much later the Matt followers wrote the story best they could recall and its probable that the other two read it before putting their version to pen.

 

[PostmodernProph]

I mean whoever in the future that wrote the first bible because it wasn't Luke or Paul who authored or penned those books. Much later the Matt followers wrote the story best they could recall and its probable that the other two read it before putting their version to pen.

there are several atheists who share your beliefs........it's a stretch to call them scholars, however, and certainly no majority......

 

[sealybobo]

whether or not Jesus existed on earth is a question of historical fact......whether he is God incarnate is a question of belief.......

Its questionable. No one from his day wrote about him while he was living. No record of his crucifixion in roman records. Its all hearsay.

it's no more hearsay than for example, the American Revolution...everything we know about that was also written by people who experienced it......

If the person who penned Luke didn't see what Luke was claiming then its hearsay right from the start. Show me Luke wrote Luke. He probably didn't even know how to write. The bibles were written over hundreds of years.

d'uh.....the various books of the Bible were written over hundreds of years....Genesis and Revelation where not written at the same time....BRILLIG!.......Luke was a contemporary of Jesus Christ.....did the people who wrote about the American Revolution experience every single event that occurred in 1776?........the gospels are communicating something to you about Jesus......you think its about who he had lunch with on Thursday after Passover......that is no more essential than knowing what color Paul Revere's horse was, to understand the American Revolution......

This actually is an extremely important point, as atheists inevitably ignore the message of the Bible and instead focus on the tiniest of details.

I get the message in nursery rhymes too but I don't believe the wild stories they tell to teach us the lessons. And the only part I don't like is that I have to believe or perish.

 

[PostmodernProph]

well crap....if you don't like it I guess God is going to have to change all his plans.....

 

[Hollie]

well crap....if you don't like it I guess God is going to have to change all his plans.....

Just invent a new religion with new gawds and make up any plan you wish. That's what the inventors of christianity did.

Nothing of any plan in any of the bibles can be attributed directly to your polytheistic gawds.

 

[PostmodernProph]

well crap....if you don't like it I guess God is going to have to change all his plans.....

Just invent a new religion with new gawds and make up any plan you wish. That's what the inventors of christianity did.

Nothing of any plan in any of the bibles can be attributed directly to your polytheistic gawds.

well if atheists already knew they could just make their own eternal paradise why do they spend so much time complaining that the Christian god has specific requirements for entering His?.......is it because they're afraid their own won't be fail-safe?......

 

[Hollie]

well crap....if you don't like it I guess God is going to have to change all his plans.....

Just invent a new religion with new gawds and make up any plan you wish. That's what the inventors of christianity did.

Nothing of any plan in any of the bibles can be attributed directly to your polytheistic gawds.

well if atheists already knew they could just make their own eternal paradise why do they spend so much time complaining that the Christian god has specific requirements for entering His?.......is it because they're afraid their own won't be fail-safe?......

There is nothing to indicate that the christian gawds have any magical paradise waiting for anyone. Your religion, and thus the dogma associated with it, comes from a collection of tales and fables of dubious authorship, some unknown authors and a plethora of outrageous and unsupportable claims.

 

[PostmodernProph]

well crap....if you don't like it I guess God is going to have to change all his plans.....

Just invent a new religion with new gawds and make up any plan you wish. That's what the inventors of christianity did.

Nothing of any plan in any of the bibles can be attributed directly to your polytheistic gawds.

well if atheists already knew they could just make their own eternal paradise why do they spend so much time complaining that the Christian god has specific requirements for entering His?.......is it because they're afraid their own won't be fail-safe?......

There is nothing to indicate that the christian gawds have any magical paradise waiting for anyone. .

and yet, you are here bitching because we won't let you in unless you believe in God......

 

[Hollie]

well crap....if you don't like it I guess God is going to have to change all his plans.....

Just invent a new religion with new gawds and make up any plan you wish. That's what the inventors of christianity did.

Nothing of any plan in any of the bibles can be attributed directly to your polytheistic gawds.

well if atheists already knew they could just make their own eternal paradise why do they spend so much time complaining that the Christian god has specific requirements for entering His?.......is it because they're afraid their own won't be fail-safe?......

There is nothing to indicate that the christian gawds have any magical paradise waiting for anyone. .

and yet, you are here bitching because we won't let you in unless you believe in God......

Who is "we"? You can't understand it but you do typify the angry, spiteful religious zealot. Are you thinking the gawds are going to assign you a position of authority at your contrived gates of heavenly bliss?

More likely, you will be assigned to a position in keeping with your abilities. You'll be a flunky heavenly Mall security guard. You can swagger around while being totally ignored as some pot bellied buffoon.

 

[PostmodernProph]

I can't imagine why they would need security guards....the atheists won't be there.......as to my place in heaven, the scriptures say we will be blessed in heaven if we are ridiculed because of our belief in Him.....I figure you've guaranteed me a room with a view all on your own......

 

[Hollie]

I can't imagine why they would need security guards....the atheists won't be there.......as to my place in heaven, the scriptures say we will be blessed in heaven if we are ridiculed because of our belief in Him.....I figure you've guaranteed me a room with a view all on your own......

Of course, like many hyper-religious you use your religion as a means to placate your fears, insecurities and superstitions.

How stereotypical that you presume to speak on behalf of your gawds and use your gawds like a bloody truncheon to promote your fears and inadequacies.

 

[PostmodernProph]

maybe even pool-side.....