Question for smart atheists

36 posts / 0 new
Last post
SergiG's picture
Question for smart atheists

Hy im from russia, and it was atheist country in 1917-1991.So i have big serious soviet Encyclopedia (33 volumes made in 1960-78 )= - And we all know that all these jewish kings from bible didnt exist - its only mentioned in that funny bible book and nowhere else, also Pontius Pilate, muhammed, jesus - all these guys exist only in their own holy books. So why then in atheist soviet enciylopedias they listed as real people? (im sure engish and american old Encyclopedias did the same).

Subscription Note: 

Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.

Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.

LostLocke's picture
The description of Pontius

The description of Pontius Pilate in the Bible isn't entirely accurate, but he was a real person.

That being said, in American encyclopedias they include people of historical significance even if that person wasn't real. You can find entries on Jesus and Yahweh/Jehovah/Allah, but you can also find Zeus or Ra or Apollo or Quetzalcoatl or any of the various other deities worshiped by man.

SergiG's picture
NBo he wasnt real person,

Pontius Pilate wasnt real person, hes only mentioned in bible. the only "evidence" is tablet with his name was found israel scientists and they newer give it to other countries to proof its real.

arakish's picture
But I have seen that tablet

But I have seen that tablet "live" in Israel during my thirty-some years of researching to prove the Bible correct. Sadly I only proved the Bible false. But the tablet you speak of is not the only evidence. Hey, Old Man, this is your area.

rmfr

SergiG's picture
Dont trrow just words like a

Dont throw just words like a cheap whore. give me evidence please that the guy exist, believer. (im sure you have that nobody have)

arakish's picture
Go find it yourself then.

Go find it yourself then.

rmfr

arakish's picture
Here you go cheap whore.

Here you go cheap whore.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilate_stone

rmfr

Diotrephes's picture
arakish,

arakish,

I'll bet that the con man who created that hoax is still laughing in his grave.

Rohan M.'s picture
@Arakish “Trying to prove the

@Arakish “Trying to prove the Bible correct.” Noted. That’s going in the “cure for religion” essay that I promised everyone here as MRK.

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ arakish

@ arakish

Sorry mate for the delay, Tacitus mentioned Pilate as being in Judea as "Procurator". There are other references to the man by other later sources but no actual 'hard evidence' of his existence until 1961 when the Ceasarian dedication tablet was found while excavating an amphitheatre (from memory) I have seen the replica but the original is on public display. The Pilate stone is currently located at the Israel Museum in Jerusalem. Replica castings can be found at the Archaeological Museum in Milan, Italy, and on display in Caesarea Maritima itself.

Pilate existed. we can accept he was Procurator of the province of Judea during the reign of Tiberius. Records of his administration have all disappeared but may well be mouldering away in some recess of the Vatican , forgotten by all. We seem to forget that although the Romans were almost OCD in their record keeping we are lucky that any records survived the revolutions, wars, dark ages, religious pogroms and suppressions where bundles of 'paper' would have been burnt for fun or warmth....or, just thrown in the midden!

Diotrephes's picture
SergiG,

SergiG,

Tarzan is listed in the encylopedias. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Tarzan

Reference books tend to include a broad sample of human knowledge, whether the characters are real or fictional. They are part of the culture. The books usually say if the character is real or fictional but in religious matters the tendency is to treat all of the characters as real people so that the fanatics won't get pissed.

SergiG's picture
REALLY????? VERY FUNNY ANSWER

REALLY????? VERY FUNNY ANSWER. You know ofcourse how encyclopedias works - it listed all persons (but if it's mythical - they listed as mythical person - example "Tarzan - fictitious personage appeared in Burroughs book". Are you trying to be smart here?

So question is still here - why atheist USSR (they dont beileve in bible) listed kings and other persons as real people even if they appear only in the bible

LostLocke's picture
Look up Zeus. The title is

Look up Zeus. The title is "Greek god".

There is no point where people thought Tarzan was real. People did think Zeus was real, some might still do. Same with Jesus. They're labelled with their primary role in human history and culture, which in an encyclopedia is more important than whether they were real or not.
An encyclopedia's job is just to give you data, not to make decisions about "reality". That's your job.

And third, I wouldn't trust a USSR era encyclopedia anyway, anymore than I'd trust a modern DPRK encyclopedia. Those people loved to blatantly lie and fill all their shit with state propaganda.

Rohan M.'s picture
Not to mention that it’s very

Not to mention that it’s very easy for one to pretend that their own brand of “millennia-old collection of bronze-aged, poorly-written fairy tales” are fact, especially if they really, really want them to be. They frantically search for and cherry-pick/invent “evidence” to support their pre-existing view (confirmation bias much?), and then pretend that it is actual science- and the irony of it all is that they then self-project by falsely claiming that say, evolution, Einstein’s general relativity, or the Big Bang has “no evidence”.

Irony meter reading is quite high on this one.

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ OP

@ OP

A lot of old encyclopedias contain references to mythical persons as if they existed. However Pilate did exist and we have contemporary accounts of his actions. None of the accounts include anything to do with a Jesus or Messiah or washing his hands of a sentence. They are more about his harshness, cruelty and eventual disgrace.

Jesus. Mohammed and Shiva (along with Zeus, Odin, Woden, Thor , Apollo, Minerva, Narcissus, Pandora et al) affect the lives of billions of people, mythical, historical or not they will appear in any record of the human race.

arakish's picture
But they don't mention me,

But they don't mention me, and I am real...

rmfr

Rohan M.'s picture
And they mentioned the

And they mentioned the impastas like Jesus, Allah, and Zeus, but how come they never mentioned the FSM- the One True Monster? I know he’s real, because he just is. Prove he doesn’t exist! Oh, and if he isn’t real, then how come DNA and springs are shaped like fusilli pasta? Checkmate, both Creationists AND Evolutionists!!!

Cognostic's picture
SergiG: "Hy im from russia,

SergiG: "Hy im from russia, and it was atheist country in 1917-1991"

YOU COULD NOT ME MORE WRONG. Russia was never an Atheist Country. That makes no sense at all. Atheist is not a political system. Atheist is not an economic system. You lived in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The USSR.

USSR in 1922 and 1936 (Russian SFSR in red). From its creation, the government in the Soviet Union was based on the one-party rule of the Communist Party (Bolsheviks).
THEY WERE COMMUNISTS WHO OUTLAWED RELIGION. The new god became the Government. ATHEISTS ARE NOT AUTOMATICALLY COMMUNISTS AND COMMUNISTS ARE NOT AUTOMATICALLY ATHEISTS. The two things have nothing to do with each other.

"And we all know that all these jewish kings from bible didnt exist -" Ummmmm.....

You could not be more wrong. It is generally agreed that the patriarchs did not exist. Moses, David, Solomon, etc.... But we have evidence for many of the kings in the Bible.

So why then in atheist soviet encyclopedias they listed as real people?

They were long accepted as real. They were real in America as well just 50 years ago. The Catholics and many protestant faiths still consider them to be real. Hell, there are Christians out there who think Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were the actual authors of the bible. What would the fact that some book asserts they are real, have to do with anything? Any book can claim anything it wants. That is what authors do when they write them. If you want to know why the author said what they did, you have to study the author. If you want to know if what they said was factual and true, you have to study the facts. Some authors are more believable than others. Why would you believe anything the Russian Encyclopedia says?

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ Cog

@ Arakish

If its any consolation you made into Miriam Webster, see: dickhead noun
dick·​head | \ˈdik-ˌhed \
Definition of dickhead
usually vulgar
: a stupid or contemptible person
First Known Use of dickhead
1964, in the meaning defined above

Hope that feels you better.

arakish's picture
Kewl. At least I am in the

Kewl. At least I am in the dictionary. But I still want an encyclopedic entry...

rmfr

SergiG's picture
??

??

SergiG's picture
hmm did my question looks

hmm did my question looks like i believe shitty propagandist soviet encyclopedia? why i ask then?
1) many jewish kings you have evidence that they are real - only mentioned in bible (you know that book that says world is created in 6 days?). If you believe bible then you are not atheist at all.

2) and i think you are right - unlike hitler germany (which was christian contry and Adold was christian until death) Soviets create new relligion. i think THATS WHY they put people mentioned only in bible as real people - its like unconscious bond between two religions. that the only reason

Rohan M.'s picture
I agree with Cog. The way

I agree with Cog. The way that Sergi describes the former USSR smells an awful lot like something Freedom From Atheism Foundation, the John Birch Society, or just some apologist who didn’t do their research would say; it kind of implies that “atheism” and “communism” are interchangeable- which is just false. I’m an atheist, I love democracy, and personally, I think that capitalism, while not perfect, is the least fucked-up of all economic systems.

Rivka's picture
Hey, some of those Jewish

Hey, some of those Jewish kings DID exist, I’m just sure none of them spoke to G-d.

SergiG's picture
some of them yeah, jewish

some of them yeah, jewish history is so f... up and consist so many pseudo facts based on bible so we dont know what their real names of these kings is

Cognostic's picture
The BIBLE is not a history

The BIBLE is not a history book and it was not written by historians. It is a religious text designed specifically to spread Christianity. It's not supposed to be Historically accurate. It is a book of parables and mythology set in a historical time.

Diotrephes's picture
Cognostic,

Cognostic,

"The BIBLE is not a history book and it was not written by historians. It is a religious text designed specifically to spread Christianity."

Do you see what you just did? You converted to my opinion.

By saying = "It is a religious text designed specifically to spread Christianity" you have effectively tossed the claim made by others that the Old Testament books were written centuries before the Jesus character.

You may not be there yet with my opinion that the entire Bible was created in the 680s-690s but you seem to be subconsciously veering in that direction.

Cognostic's picture
Apologies. The old testament

Apologies. The old testament was made by a bunch of Jews perpetuating their faith. They invented a Moses character and a bunch of patriarchs and then tried to convince people that they were special and had a covenant with god.. The Christians came along and invented Jesus from the writings of the Old Testament. The books are still religious texts and not historical documents. They are set in a time period but that is the only thing historical about them.

They are not historical books, though they do contain some historical writing.

??? The entire bible, Old and New Testaments 168? Are we confusing ourselves with a common language?

"The Bible, Old Testament and New Testament is a religious text. The Old Testament justifies the existence of the Jewish people and describes their covenant with god. The New Testament justifies the Christian Religion and describes their salvation from the rapture. The fact that the stories are put into a historical time frame says nothing about history or the intent of the books. The Jews used their book to justify and spread their faith. The Christians used their book to justify and spread their faith. My POINT, they are not HISTORICALLY ACCURATE TEXTS. They are not history books but fables, allegories, and religious stories.

SergiG's picture
yeah i know that so what?

"he BIBLE is not a history book and it was not written by historians. It is a religious text designed specifically to spread Christianity. It's not supposed to be Historically accurate. It is a book of parables and mythology set in a historical time.'

yeah i know that so what? do you agree with muy point that ussr listed bible people because stalinism is religion too?

Cognostic's picture
If the point you were trying

If the point you were trying to make is that "Stalinism was a religion too." I would agree. If you read my post, in fact, I said that.

"USSR in 1922 and 1936 (Russian SFSR in red). From its creation, the government in the Soviet Union was based on the one-party rule of the Communist Party (Bolsheviks).
THEY WERE COMMUNISTS WHO OUTLAWED RELIGION. The new god became the Government. ATHEISTS ARE NOT AUTOMATICALLY COMMUNISTS AND COMMUNISTS ARE NOT AUTOMATICALLY ATHEISTS. The two things have nothing to do with each other."

Diotrephes's picture
SergiG,

SergiG,

"do you agree with muy point that ussr listed bible people because stalinism is religion too?"

I accept your opinion on the matter because you have lived in that society. But that society no longer exists as it once did. And because things have changed is it relevant to us as we enter the year 2019?

Pages

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.