Donating = Loving
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.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
Donating = Loving
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.
Donating = Loving
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.
FREE E-BOOKS
Get the book "Why There Is No God" and one more book for FREE!
Sign up below for the Atheist Republic Newsletter to get the books.
Record Your Message!
Record your voice here for it to be aired on the Atheist Republic Voicemails Podcast.
Send us your views and opinions, your personal stories, messages of support, comments on recent news, or any comments you would like to share about your part of the world.
Note : By clicking record you are allowing us to broadcast your message on any of our platforms.
Affiliate Disclaimer
Links to atheist related books, shirts and movies and other atheism related products are affiliate links.
All proceeds will go to keeping the Atheist Republic website up and running; providing resources, advocacy, community tools and encouragement to atheists all over the world.
I have seen that, and it is handy if you know what you're looking for. However, many of the "contradictions" he posted are not contradictons at all, and some are pretty easy explained. I would suggest trying to falsify each contradiciton claim yourself before you ever present one to a Chrisitan.
Like i said not easily used on the mobile. Thats a bit disappointing what i could see of it looked good.
HEY! YOU CAN GET ALL THE TOOLS YOU NEED HERE: There is a book on Amazon called AntiChrist:Exposing Christianiy. It is one of a kind awesome!! It lists discrepencies in Bible and crimes of God
I would also like to debate Christians. I am also an ex Christian.
Cool just dont limit it to christians remember they are all idiots lol
Yeah the big difference between Religion and Salvation is that with Religion you have to earn your way to God by following all the Rules..... With Salvation God comes to you..... That is why all religions are inherently flawed...... and concentrated more on controlling human behavior and gaining power over other human beings....... Its all the Law weather it be of the Religious or Secular (Statism) variety .... to control Human behavior .... The is a third option Anarchism .... that there should be no Laws... just unchecked human behavior.......
The whole Idea of Salvation is that there is ultimate freedom because now God lives in you..... so you don't need Religion .... or the State...... to control you....... I guess that could be construed as a form of Anarchism...... ;-).
"The whole Idea of Salvation is that there is ultimate freedom because now God lives in you..... so you don't need Religion .... or the State...... to control you....... I guess that could be construed as a form of Anarchism...... "
I, too, guess it could be construed that way, but only after ingesting dangerous chemicals... Being inhabited by the ultimate monarch of the universe would be just about as far on the opposite end of the spectrum as you could get from any meaningful definition of anarchism.
Ohhh OHHH ... maybe i missed one.... Socialism..... that your behavior can be controlled by your relationship with the other people around you.... ie.... you wont kill your neighbor cause then your other neighbors will be displeased with you..... IDK... i guess it could work.... cept i guess your neighbors might agree with you...... or maybe capitalism.... your behavior could be controlled so as not to lose an economic advantage that is useful in survival.....
I am am a exchristian..... turned agnostic.... turned follower of Jesus..... that is why for me Religion and Secularism are old news compared with Salvation......
Try not to get too frustrated as there are no (at least I haven't heard any) "logical" answers for the contradictions in the bible. The only logical answer is that the bible was written by men for men. Be prepared.
Matthjar/Andrew, I do not understand what knowledge you have on this Jesus of yours if not from the bible.
Do you follow what the church preaches about Jesus or you have your own personal Jesus that agrees with your ideas of what is right and what is wrong?
Did you create your own personal Jesus?(without knowing)
You are very unclear on what is Jesus and what do you think are his teachings and what are not.
Be more specific and maybe people would deem you reasonable enough to reply to you.
Noooooo! I am now stuck with that Giorgio Armani / Depeche Mode commercial stuck in my head. Luckily I like the song.....
Your own Personal Jesus
Someone to hear your prayers
Someone who cares
Your own Personal Jesus
Someone to hear your prayers
Someone who’s there… …
Love that song!
"1/Yes the only information I have on jesus is from the gospels written around 2000 years ago."
What if that information is just created by imperfect man? Just like the church?
I can quote direct contradictions where Jesus clearly says that you must hate people to follow him.
King James Bible
If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.
or when Jesus asks you to love everybody like yourself, when he knows from start that you cannot possibly do that and remain alive.
Thus making you feel guilty and find salvation only in just believing in his existence. Since all you need is to blindly believe right? Then you are exempted from your sins right?
Can't you see that this theology is an evil theology? created to control people like sheep. Jesus adds insult to injury by actually calling you sheep in the gospels.
It is clearly an allegorical literature made to make fun of slaves/illiterate people and make them hate the Jew and the people who had the knowledge to understand what the theology really was. A mockery of the Jews and make them hated by most people in the roman empire. Since the Jews couldn't even recognize their own messiah, their opinion and word meant nothing.
4/ I think since Jesus is quite interesting its best for people to actually see some of what he said first
What he said proves he is false.
Go and read your gospel before posting such nonsense Andrew.
Some evil quotes from the bible:
http://www.evilbible.com/Evil%20Bible%20Quotes.htm
Some contradictions of the new testament and old testament:
http://www.evilbible.com/contradictions.htm
Believe me, there is more than this.
Coming to this thread late, hope I can still be of help. Here's a primer of contradictions I've gathered, but first I'd like to call your attention to one of the top theologians on the planet the Distinguished James A. Gray Professor Rev. Dr. Bart Ehrman who is head of the Department on Religious Studies at UNC Chapel Hill, NC, center of the Bible belt. Dr. Ehrman is one of the few Biblical historians that can read and write Greek Koine and RCC Latin, which is different than Latin used for scientific and medical terms and is what Eusebius wrote the Latin Vulgate in, between 325 and 380AD, which is the precursor to all versions of the New Testament. Translated from 5,700 Greek manuscripts, however no original text and only copies of copies that are highly fragmented and none complete before 325AD. The Codex Sinaiticus created between the same years in Greek, mirrors much of the Vulgate, but it wasn't discovered until 1844.
This is a must read for atheists and a highly recommended read for followers of the New Testament:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfheSAcCsrE
Ehrman has written about 25 books and has hours of seminars and debates on You Tube. I consider him the ipso-facto expert on the history of the New Testament and why it's not logical to take it with more than a grain of salt. That's just on history, not even a need to show contradictions. The disbelief comes from the alterations and natural fault of humans when they relate a story to someone else and they relate it to someone else and so on and so on and it goes on for a 1,000 year by word of mouth and hand.
The key to understanding the Bible, IMO, especially the New Testament, is researching the authorship and the validity of it's authors as it's been transcribed hundreds of times hand to hand over a 1,000 years before the printing press was invented, and took translating through 5 different languages Aramaic, Hebrew, Greek and Latin, until it finally made it to English in 1384 when John Wycliffe wrote the first English Bible which was highly altered by Tyndale and later Coverdale. Most Christians don't know that there were no eye witnesses that wrote about Jesus and the first Greek fragment we have dates to 140AD, 100 years after Jesus supposedly died. Most don't know that the first page of the New Testament wasn't even written until after the Council of Nicaea in 325AD. That Josephus and Tacitus have been discredited. Most don't know that Biblical scholars pretty much agree that half of the books of Paul are forgeries.
Here are the contradictions.
God gives freely to? those who ask James 1:5/ Luke 11:10
God withholds his blessings and prevents men from receiving them
John 12:40/ Josh 11:20/ Is 63:17
God is to be found by those who seek him Matt 7:8/ Prov 8:17
God is not to be found by those who seek him Prov 1:28
God tempts men Gen 22:1/ 2 Sam 24:1/ Jer 20:7/ Matt 6:13
God tempts no man James 1:13
God's attributes are revealed in his works Rom 1:20
God's attributes cannot be discovered Job 11:7/ Is 40:28
God is satisfied with his work Gen 1:31
God is dissatisfied with his works. Gen 6:6
God dwells in chosen temples 2 Chron 7:12
God dwells not in temples Acts 7:4 3.
God dwells in light Tim 6:16
God dwells in darkness 1 Kings 8:12/ Ps 18:11/ Ps 97:2 4.
God is seen and heard Ex 33:23/ Ex 33:11/ Gen 3:9,10/ Gen 32:30/ Is 6:1/ Ex 24:9-11
God is invisible and cannot be heard John 1:18/ John 5:37/ Ex 33:20/ 1 Tim 6:16
God is satisfied with his work Gen 1:31
God is dissatisfied with his works. Gen 6:6
God dwells in light Tim 6:16
God dwells in darkness 1 Kings 8:12/ Ps 18:11/ Ps 97:2
God is seen and heard Ex 33:23/ Ex 33:11/ Gen 3:9,10/ Gen 32:30/ Is 6:1/ Ex 24:9-11
God is invisible and cannot be heard John 1:18/ John 5:37/ Ex 33:20/ 1 Tim 6:16
Sorry for the double posted scriptures at the bottom, new to the website, I couldn't find an edit button and also, after I clicked on the previous post, I noticed the links he gave you covered the same contradictions I reprinted. Hope you check out Dr. Erhman though, if he can't convince a follower of Christianity of who actually wrote the Bible and to doubt that any of it is the Word of their God, then they probably are lost sheep and confirmation bias will prevent them from accepting common sense reality.
Isnt everything written by paul discredited plus nothing was written about jeasus in the new testament till 345 ad in the council of nicea. Ever played chinese whispers or the telephone game after over 100 generations im sure any resemblance to an actual event is unlikely.
"Im thinking jesus was saying - if you want to follow my way of life you will need to love the things I stand for even more than loving your own family and life."
Again you are applying your bias.
Loving something more then something else, is NOT; hate something or else you cannot be a christian.
These are 2 different things.
Some christian apologetic try to change the meaning of the word Hate (miseo) as meaning 'Love less' instead of hate. Which is a lie since in all those verses that 'miseo' is used, it means actual hate, not love less.
https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G3404
Why can't you acknowledge that Matthew is saying one thing and Luke is saying an other thing?
Remove the bias that the gospel have to agree on things. They almost agree on nothing if you read them side by side.(this is a fact)
Try the Resurrection part for starters.
"I am interested in what actually happened back there and how things are now portrayed to the church"
It doesn't seem so, from where I am standing.
You seem not interested in what actually happened but to get a different idea about Jesus then what the Church has.
This is shown from the fact that you did not answer my questions, and seemed not interested in knowing more on the context of the era of when Jesus supposedly lived.
"For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and one’s foes will be members of one’s own household." (St. Matthew 10:35-36 NRSV)
Here Jesus is saying that he has come to bring division, it is not the church saying it, it is Jesus himself.
You seem to try and put all the blame on the Church when it is clearly not so.
The gospels main agenda is not to agree with each other, they were never created for that purpose, They are there for the preacher to have the right words for any type of audience.
Just like in politics, you need the right speech for any particular audience.
People that are fighting among each-other,(brother killing brother, etc...) in those times didn't wanna hear a preacher saying love one an other. They would not follow or be attracted to the religion that way.
But would be attracted to a religion if the preacher says to them:
Here look, god says it is a good thing to hate you brothers, in fact Jesus says:
If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.
Now learn humility and be a christian and you will be granted heaven by our most merciful, Our Lord Jesus Christ.
This is what was a preachers job during the year 80-onwards AD, gather as many followers as possible.
This was the real agenda.
If you want to know why, i can explain it to you, but show some interest in the history of this period first.
Else I will be wasting my time.
I was a Christian at one stage in my life. My parents were religion and thought that they were doing the right thing by bringing me up one as well. I think when I started to question religion and there were no answers, that I started to wonder if it was true. So I looked into it and began to realise that what religion is, is just a way of structural obedience and being kept under control by the church.
Needless to say that I'm a much happier person with no burdens of religion weighing down on my shoulders.
same here, but i had more social pressure since my country is 97% Catholic Christians :(
Thats tough being known as atheist under those conditions could stop you getting work, a wife, the home you want etc they pile on pressure and dont realise its wrong because their book tells them its ok.
Show me proof jeasus existed
gezz, your that far gone Andreww.
"the idea was to make people feel like they would never be able to follow jesus"
I have explained the objective of the author, and it is not that, can't you read.
"The gospels main agenda is not to agree with each other, they were never created for that purpose, They are there for the preacher to have the right words for any type of audience."
People in those time they couldn't read, so it was just not needed for the gospel to agree with itself or with others. The preacher chooses what to say and when from the gospel. It is really that simple.
It is later in history that the church united the gospels in 1 book that these problems started to emerge(more apparent)
A lot of Christians were killed for this purpose like the Gnostic Christians (which were like half the Christians) were completely wiped out.
It is a problem that you, being a christian must face with honesty and not trying to change what Jesus said to fit more your bias of what Jesus should be.
"The woman who was being stoned to death for committing adultery (a sexist stoning) - jesus asked the person without sin to throw the first stone, and then said since no one condems you neither do i, but go and sin no more. Jesus is not condoning adultery, yet is saying something about how eager we are to judge others."
That is agreed by all scholars that it has been added later in the middle ages, it wasn't in the gospel originally.
See your bias, you have just 1 source of information and think it is LITERALLY the gospel truth without checking on it.
"The first story in this chapter is not found in the two earliest surviving Egyptian papyri (P66 and P75). It is also absent from the two famous 4th century bibles prepared for Ecclesiastical use (apparently by Eusebius for Emperor Constantine), Codex Vaticanus and Sinaiticus.
Most 'modern' translations (produced in the 1960s to 1980s) include the passage but enclose it in brackets, with a note to the effect that it is "not found in the oldest and best manuscripts", or a similar statement."
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Biblical_Studies/New_Testament_Commentaries...
If you were honest:
"I am interested in what actually happened back there and how things are now portrayed to the church"
Then check this 1 hr documentary on the most likely truth which has evidence to support it:
http://vimeo.com/69145519
This is called researching and doing your homework. Your opinion about Jesus is just your opinion which I have demonstrated with just logic over and over again that is completely wrong.
the majority of scholars say that Jesus existed.
The majority of scholars don't say that your Jesus existed.
They don't say that the Jesus that made miracles and rose from the dead, was born of a virgin existed.
They say that most likly a similar character named jesus existed.
Although their reasons are not founded, they never say what you think they said.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwUZOZN-9dc&list=PLL6lMurrJrczTFOoNpHvFW...
here is an idea of what the majority of scollars think.
What the majority of scholars think is irrelevant. The majority of atheists, including prominant scholarly atheists like Richard Dawkins, believe in some variation of what is essentially Darwinian evolution, a theory with not a shred of evidence or any real scientific value.
If you dont believe Darwin, you MUST believe something. I would love to hear it so i can poke the holes in it as you all seem so happy to do with theism.
"If you don't believe Darwin, you MUST believe something."
I don't believe anything, I look at the evidence and give possibilities.
It is OK to admit that you do not know something.
You do not have to believe anything, especially a book that has so many holes.
The word scholar is a pretty non-specific word. A scholar of what?
No major doctrinal view is at issue as a result of any of these perceived contradictions or mistakes. Most if not all can be answered with a little biblical and historical context.
My dear, harsh as it may sound, you were never a true Christian to begin with if you can now call yourself an ex-christian atheist.
I dont believe in ex-christians. The entire concept is to me paradoxical
My dear, harsh as it may sound, you were never a true C̶h̶r̶i̶s̶t̶i̶a̶n̶ Santa Claus believer to begin with if you can now call yourself an ex-C̶h̶r̶i̶s̶t̶i̶a̶n̶ Santa Claus believer.
This is a text book example of the informal logical fallacy "No True Scotsman".
A simple rendition of the fallacy:
Person A: "No Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge."
Person B: "But my uncle Angus likes sugar with his porridge."
Person A: "Ah yes, but no TRUE Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge."
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman)
Pages