Any help would be greatly appreciated
Sent in by Mike
Hello everyone,
It seems that I am finding that I too am leaving Christianity. It is hard, but my experience seems to indicate that there is no God. If he does exist, I find that He is uncaring and selfish. I will share my testimony shortly in another post.
I have a question. Does anybody know of any good books written by scholars about how the bible came to be etc? I have heard that many so called prophesies about Jesus were added into the Old Testament to make it appear that Jesus fulfilled them? Is that true?
Basically I want to find out the truth, not some preacher or apologists stretched out truth. I need to find truly unbiased work about all this stuff.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks everyone for your open candor and stories as well as all the support I often see on this site. It is nice to know that I am not the only one going through this kind of “loss of faith” process. I am amazed at how many people are feeling the same way.
Thanks for your help everyone.
Hello everyone,
It seems that I am finding that I too am leaving Christianity. It is hard, but my experience seems to indicate that there is no God. If he does exist, I find that He is uncaring and selfish. I will share my testimony shortly in another post.
I have a question. Does anybody know of any good books written by scholars about how the bible came to be etc? I have heard that many so called prophesies about Jesus were added into the Old Testament to make it appear that Jesus fulfilled them? Is that true?
Basically I want to find out the truth, not some preacher or apologists stretched out truth. I need to find truly unbiased work about all this stuff.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks everyone for your open candor and stories as well as all the support I often see on this site. It is nice to know that I am not the only one going through this kind of “loss of faith” process. I am amazed at how many people are feeling the same way.
Thanks for your help everyone.
Comments
The first five books of the Bible: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy
are said to be adoptions taken from the Torah, supposedly the central and most important document of Judaism. The Bible to my understanding had undergone umpteen revisions; there are so many versions available, and any one version may not say exactly what the next version says.
Some people, myself included, have left Christianity, after reading the Bible [Old Testamment and New Testament]. Why? Because the God of Abraham as portrayed can be seen as an evil god with a killer instinct, killing recklessly or mindlessly. One can easily reach this conclusion after reading Exodus, Leviticus etc. Just read Revelation in the New Testament to note the celebration of gore and cruelty by the Christian God or the Trinity.The person who wrote Revelation could have been suffering from brain seizure or hallucination.
The people who wrote the New Testament probably never met Jesus.
There are discrepancies between the gospels of Luke and Matthew, for example, some of the names of Jesus' so-called ancestors [Genealogy of Jesus]mentioned in Luke are not found in Matthew; in Matthew, Joseph and Mary moved to Nazareth after the birth of Jesus but in Luke Joseph and Mary lived in Nazareth and moved to Bethlehem, where Jesus was supposedly born.
Apparently, Rome was not aware of the miracles allegedly performed by Jesus; news could have spread fast even in those days. Walking on waves, feeding five thousand with two loaves, raising the dead etc are just just what it says in the Bible. It is just a question of one's beliefs.
But in believing in a God supposedly all-powerful and all-loving, one also needs to look at the world from a holistic perspective, in other words, look at the big picture. By looking at the big picture, one can reason that a lot of things about religious beliefs do not make sense.
These are easy reads and full of information on the myth of Christianity.
There are many more,...go to your local used book store and get them cheap!
Abraham was a much like any of the nomadic herdsman that still exist in these times, mysoginistic(sp?), brutally hierarchical, and worshiping an angry god who required animal and occasionally human sacrifice. The region was full of many religions all barely distinguishable from each other, but Abraham's god was supposedly the most powerful and chose him as his special person. In his time there would be very little to distinguish his god from any other, other than beign the "True" one.
When Israel emerged from Egypt they committed genocide, slaughtering anyone who they came in contact with. The nation of Israel was caught on the edge of numerous empires over thousands of years and only flourished when empires waned and left them alone. The truth is Israel was never the loyal god fearing nation the Bible likes to portray. It always had a wide variety of views and many people basically apathetic. If you look at the kings of Israel there is very little to distinguish them from other kings. King Saul was choosen by god, and apparently a good king, but David overthrew him because "god said so". Solomon the so called wise king, spent so much money he had to give several cities away to pay his debts. Not sure Yahweh would happy with that. I doubt these kings would really identify with the way they have been portrayed in the Bible.
Israel was a pathetic, insignificant nation that only existed for a few short periods in history.
I'd recommend an article by Jim Blanston called 'The Authorship of the Bible', particularly chapter four describing the doubts scholars hold for each book of the bible.
It's available here:
http://www.qdeansloan.com/articles/authorship.htm
(You may need to adjust the text size in your browser to read it more easily?)
If you're interested in something a bit more heavy going (and slightly more esoteric) I found this 6 part series really interesting. Part One is here:
http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/biblewho1.htm
Also,
regarding prophecies about Jesus, I don't think any were added in to the OT, more like interpretations were squeezed out of certain passages. These either didn't really apply, or weren't prophecies in the first place, at least not about any messiah.
You can see for yourself how twisted some of them were.
Wherever it (mainly Matthew) says
"This was to fulfill the prophecy, blah, blah", just look up what it's referencing in the OT and you'll find it's pretty twisted to fit.
Eg: Matthew 27:3-10 about Judas throwing the 30 pieces of silver into the temple then the priests using them to buy the 'potters field', etc.
This is Matthew trying to stitch together a few passages from several different places in the OT.
Firstly Zechariah 11:12-13, which is not a messianic prophecy, and also makes no mention of any field.
Then also Jeremiah 32:6-9, where Jeremiah buys a field from his cousin, for 17 shekels of silver - not a prophecy at all.
As you can see from those passages Matthew has really mashed elements together to get his full 'fulfillment' from passages that weren't even prophecies.
Also this doesn't take into account Acts 1:18-20 which says it was Judas who bought the field (not the priests), and makes no mention of it being a 'potters field', which you'd think would be important if it's really a fulfillment of God's plan.
Also, Acts 1:18 says that Judas fell headlong into that field where his body burst open, etc. whereas Matthew says he went off and hanged himself.
So, besides the phony phulfilments, we have a contradiction in the manner of Judas death between Matthew and Acts (how could the Holy Spirit have let that happen?!).
Yet, still my point can be continued by looking at Acts 1:20.
Peter says that Judas field was called the 'Field of Blood' because of something written in Psalms.
He completely arbitrarily applies Psalm 69:25 to the situation as if it's some kind of fulfillment, when the topic of the Psalm is completely different.
Then he goes on to pick a line from Psalm 109:8, "May another take his place of leadership".
This is just a further example of their tactic - dragging up any scriptural 'support' they can for whatever situation is at hand (in this case choosing a new apostle) whether the passage was originally intended that way or not.
I could go on, (for example the 'Nazarene' 'fulfillment' in Matthew 2:23, which doesn't even have any OT prophecy to back it up) but you can have more fun looking them up for yourself... Asking yourself, "Would I have seen any 'fulfillment' of these OT passages if the NT writers hadn't already suggested it for me?"
Also, the 'born of a virgin' fulfillment is an interesting one to look up if you haven't already (noting the differences between the Hebrew words Almah and Betulah).
Part 1 and 2
This is a good place to start. Just read them. Part 2 actually does a very good job of show how riduculous the bible really is.
Origins of Canon are pretty much on the web...
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/a/canon.html
are a couple of good ones...
If you will read the infamous isaiah 7, you will see that the mysterious child in verse 14 will be born in king ahaz' lifetime--born very soon. It is not a "prophecy" of jesus.
Also see micah 5, where they want to see a foretelling of jesus' birth. Notice the name "bethlehem ephrathah" (jerusalem version) This refers to the clan of Hur, the first born of Ephrathah, the wife of Caleb. Bethlehem is Ephrathah's great-grandson. See 1st chronicles 2. The fourth chapter says that Bethlehem is her grandson.
micah is talking about a great family who will lead them against the Assyrians. He is not talking about the village of bethlehem.
And the 'Monk is right: isaiah does say "young woman". He does not say "virgin".
Thanks so much for all the great advice. I look forward to the study. Again, thanks for giving me some direction on what and where to look.
Mike
Question: Which Came First?
There is an almost insurmountable problem facing many who come out of the fiction called xianity. It effects those who call themselves free-thinkers or atheists. This problem is simply thatthe lies of xianity continue to effect them.
Ever since birth, children have been told that jezuz is god -- jezuz is the "xian" god incarnate who came to earth as a "man." This grows into one of the most stupid inventions of all -- the xian "trinity" of god, jezuz, holey ghast -- one and the same -- same substance, all god yada, yada, yada.
So, it is logical -- when one discovers the fiction of jezuz and leave leaves this farce -- to "ass-u-me" that since there is no jezuz, there is no G-d. OOPS! A major blunder and total lapse in logic.
Just because xianity is a fraud and jezuz -- with his band of merry men -- are fiction does not destroy the source of everything. That source created time, gravity, dark matter, dark energy, our solar system, the universe, electrons, protons, neutrons, quarks, leptons and mesons -- the inner workings of the atom; the very sparks of our Creator. Also, endlessness, infinity and beyond, and nothingness -- all are creations. Jezuz, xianity, man-mad religion have nothing to do with this very source of ALL. As a matter of fact, they have nothing to do with anything of substance in the cosmos or our life. Our Creator keeps ALL in place; us living; the universe expanding -- moment-by-moment, like a heart beat. Scientists have recently discovered a heart beat -- unceasing pulses in the universe.
The "atheists" and so-called "free-thinkers" unconsciously throw all of this knowledge -- the baby with the bath water -- out the window when they leave man-made religion (predominately xianity) behind. This is a classic case of ignorance -- IGNORing facts; the very facts that science continues to discover as time passes. Almost every decade, astrophysics, particle physics et al discover a new paradigm.
So here we have these persons newly freed from the prison of xian theology (atheists, free-thinkers) IGNORing our very Creation and our Creator. Instead these newly "free-thinkers" reject a Creator, while only seeing the very xian vision -- long ago implanted in their psych -- an anthropomorphic image of a god as jezuz or an old white haired man with long beard. Mormons are so nutty they even declare that their god was a man living on the planet Kolob.
Then the debate continues -- xian vs. free-thinkers (atheists) -- evolution vs. creation, yada, yada, yada. The nut cases on each side stoning the other when neither had a grain of wisdom! Funny, but Mr. Evolutionist doesn't even consider that his primordial ooze was a Creation by the source of Creation. Conversely the Creation nuts are dominated by xian fundys claiming that jezuz was the creator of all -- citing John 1:1 from the xian holey babble fiction.
The atheists and free-thinkers ran from xianity, but still have a xian/jezuz "ball and chain" attached to their brains and logic. So the Michael Savage story has even more significance -- the hobo has a better grasp on the cosmos that atheists and free-thinkers.
Michael asked him "Do you believe in G-d?"
To which the "traveler" replied, "What! Do you think I created myself?" He then turned and walked away.
So what have we learned? Free-thinks (atheists) are not real thinkers, but merely innocent people in a blind rebellion against the fiction of xianity and it purveyors -- theologians, clergy, missionaries and apologists. In so doing, they IGNORE their Creator and even science. These "free-thinkers" need to study the consequences of Professor Mike Disney (Astrophysicist, School of Physics & Astronomy, Cardiff University) declaration:
"The greatest obstacle to advancement in science is the illusion of knowledge."
Now is the time to provide some pertinent insights from the Rebbe -- ponder them, for therein lies wisdom!
"The atheist, too, has a god, and it is himself."
The idolator at least understands there is something greater than him, something beyond the grasp of his physical senses, some external forces to which he is subject."
"But for the atheist, all the universe is defined by his own understanding, all ethics and morals are subject to his approval and even he himself is an artifact of his own mind."
"He is a self-made man, for he creates his own universe and squeezes himself inside it."
_________________________
"Any reason we may suppose for G-d's will could not be the ultimate reason. The finite mind cannot begin to fathom an infinite wisdom--never mind that which brought forth wisdom from the Void. The ultimate knowledge is that we do not know."
"That there are matters we don't understand is obvious--how could the finite intellect of an inherently subjective mortal being, imprisoned within the confines of time and space, be expected to fathom the infinite wisdom of the Creator? The great wonder is that there are matters we can understand."
"True, G-d knows all before it occurs. More than that: It is His knowledge that brings all events into being. But we still have free choice. You claim this is illogical. I ask you: Knowledge of existence before any thought of any thing exists is logical? When we talk about the Source of All Existence, our principles of logic no longer apply. We don't understand a thing, because there is no understanding."
_________________________
Perhaps for the "free-thinkers/atheists" it would be best for them to think outside of their xian colored mind-set; grasp the Hebrew name for our Creator, cosmic unity -- Ein-Sof -- endlessness -- meaning the Being that has “no end."
Perhaps when the CR course on the fiction of jezuz -- the non-historical character of the xian bible -- finishes, we should republish a fantastic book, Mind Over Matter, the Rebbe on Science, Technology and Medicine. In it, one gets right down into the middle of science -- theories, facts, quarks and much, much more. Yep, right down to particle physics.
So free-thinkers/atheists -- start to cleanse your brains of your lingering subconscious xian influence. Then you can really think free. There is whole new universe out there waiting for you! Who knows, you might even discover it for yourself!
Oh yeah, regarding abiogenesis; which came first, the primordial ooze or Ein-Sof?
John
http://jdstone.org
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Christianity-Revealed/
Check out this lecture series from the Teaching Company. It will give you new insight as to who wrote the bible and how it came together.
I've ordered tonnes of thier courses since becoming an exchristian. The christianity I practiced for 20 years always frowned upon acquiring “worldly knowledge” and now I just can't get enough of it.
I hope you enjoy it as much as I did. Cheers.
Greg
http://www.teach12.com/teach12.asp?ai=16281
History of the Bible: The Making of the New Testament Canon
Thanks for the information. I appreciate your comments and help.
Mike
Damn, how grateful I am that you set me straight. Here I thought that there was no god and no purpose or goal. jesus, how wrong I was!!
I now see the purpose that the Creator intended. He intends that I spread my superior DNA through all of his creation. I will begin immediately by raping teenage girls, thus fulfilling what General Patton called the biological mission.
Now, have I apprehended your "theology" adequately? Hmmm?
Then, after I have impregnated 5 or 6 hundred lucky females, I will set myself up as a teacher, and gather around myself disciples. How's this for a title: Pontius Pilate and the Spike Drivin' Five. Cute, huh? Think of it: We, and our descendants, and our descendant's descendants, spending centuries purifying and improving the race. Shit, not even Nietsche; not even Hitler, had such a vision.
John.......the reason we are atheists is not because we are just too stupid to understand your glorious universe. We are atheists for the sake of intellectual maturity. Once the notion of god is allowed into the process, anything is allowable. god is whatever you want. god is whatever you say it is. If I want to rape 12 year old girls, that's god.
No, I am not bullshitting. Read your history. The xristian religion was invented by over educated, effeminate screwballs who had been reading too much Aristotle and sat about dreaming up the pious, mystical nonsense that we are still fighting. god was what they said it was.
No gods, John. No gods. Dream on if you must, but don't spread it around.
IT IS I
I hope you don't go to church to pray, because in your god's eye you will be a hypocrite. Here's the correct way to pray.
Matthew 6.6: "But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.
6:7 But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking...."
Here's a site just for you, IT IS I. It's simultaneously funny and sad (sad, in that people believe myths are real).
http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_teachings_of_jesus/on_prayer/mt06_05.html
May you pray to your Jealous god in church.
Cheers
I have a few questions of my own. First of all, prove that Ein-Sof exists outside the Sepher Yetzirah and similar literary flights of fancy.
Secondly, is Ein-Sof eternal? If so, why is it okay for Ein-Sof to be eternal but not other things -- Why does everything other than the object of your particular worship have to be temporal and "created"?
And finally, why do so many people just assume that their hypothetical creator-being has a personality and needs or wants to be worshipped? Does not compute.
Um, I see. On the one hand you say that a layman can't "really" understand the Bible.
And in the next breath you say "But I do know..."
Nice 2x4 you've got in your eye there, sir or madam. You've apparently set up your entire personal belief system on the basis a book that you can't properly understand.
Unless you actually base your beliefs on a personal "spiritual experience." Fine with us. We're not going to come roaring into your house over your Internet connection and try to rip your faith out of your head.
But if you continue to hang out here, I guarantee that we'll challenge you each and every time you claim to have "The Truth."
And, in the end, you'll either wander away whining about us evil unbelievers, or you'll start to look at the hard questions and take your first steps towards freedom.
What do you make of the passage in the gospels where Christ is quoted as having told his disciples that he would return before some of them die? I don't have the bible with me, and I don't recall where it is found, but the quote is to the effect of "I tell you truly, there be some among you standing here that shall not taste of death, until you see the son of man coming in the clouds." Apparently, he is telling them that he will return before some of them die! That was two thousand years ago! They're DEAD! He did not return "in the clouds," did he? Again, if any of the bible is questionable, ALL of it is. That's our point when we point out it's apparent errors.
Perhaps you can answer some questions. If one is "saved," for having "accepted Jesus," then, why did Christ say that one may not "enter heaven" unless one "becomes as a child?" Why is it harder for a rich man to enter in, according to Christ? It should be just as simple for a rich man to enter in, if he "accepted Jesus" as it would be for anybody who has done so, if what the church says is true. Why must ones "righteousness exceed that of the scribes and pharisees" in order to enter heaven, again, according to Christ himself? What if those same scribes and pharisees "accepted Jesus?" Wouldn't they be "saved," regardless of the state of their "righteousness?" Why, then would Christ say such a thing? Why, in Luke, just before the transfiguration, does Christ tell those around him that if they wish to "follow after him," they must take up their cross DAILY? This, again, defies the christian doctrine of salvation, since said salvation guarantees entry into heaven for having once "accepted Jesus" regardless of how that person lives their life afterwards. There is no need to do anything DAILY, according to the church. Jesus and the church are at odds with each other here! Throughout the gospels, Christ repeatedly defies the christian doctrine of salvation! What do you make of Matthew 23:13, where Christ says, (Again, this may not be an exact quote, since I don't have the bible with me,) "Woe unto you, scribes and pharisees, hypocrites! For ye have shut up the kingdom of heaven against men. For ye neither go in yourselves, nor suffer ye to allow others that are entering to go therein." First of all, how could the scribes and pharisees "shut up the kingdom of heaven against men?" Also, notice the words "for ye niether go in yourselves" where Christ reveals that entry into heaven is in the present moment, disregarding the afterlife altogether!" This, again, defies the christian doctrine of salvation. How do explain these things?
Another passage that comes to mind is the one where Christ tells his disciples that his parables are for them to understand, not others nearby, "lest they be converted and be saved." Christ is saying that it is not for certain people to understand his words and be "saved!" He is denying them entry into heaven! Whether or not they "accept Jesus" doesn't matter at all. Also, notice in said passage that it is his words that "save," not "accepting him," according to Christ himself. Once again, Christ defies the christian doctrine of salvation.
I'm sorry I don't recall where these passages are found, but they are in there. I'll return later with the locations of those passages.
Another major flaw in the bible is the chapter in Isaiah that is nearly word for word identical with one of the chapters in II Kings. I believe it's chapters 19 and 36 or 37, of which book I don't recall. Again, I'll bring that information with me next time.
The bible is a mess, and christianity is nonsense. By nonsense, I mean it does not make sense.