Arguments Against Christianity
There are at least eight insurmountable problems within the extant evidence that each independently refute the Christian doctrine of a divine Jesus:
Jesus’ endorsement of the murderous immorality of Yahweh in the Torah;
Jesus’ doctrine of “eternal punishment” in the “eternal fire” of Hell;
Jesus’ failure to claim actual divinity;
Jesus’ failed prophecy of his imminent return;
Jesus’ failure to competently reveal his doctrines (concerning e.g. salvation, hell, divorce, circumcision, and diet) in his own written account or that of an eyewitness;
Jesus’ failure to perform miracles the accounts of which cannot be so easily explained as faith-healing, misinterpretation, exaggeration, and embellishment;
Jesus’ failure to attract significant notice (much less endorsement) in the only detailed contemporaneous history of first-century Palestine;
Jesus’ failure to recruit
anyone from his family,
any acquaintance from before his baptism,
a majority of Palestinian Jews, and even
some of those who heard his words and witnessed his alleged miracles.
An omnipotent omniscience benevolent deity competently attempting a revelation would have foreseen and corrected all of these problems. The existence of any one of them implies that Christian doctrine is false. The reasons not to believe the Christian doctrine of a divine Jesus can be divided into four categories:
the alternative naturalistic explanations of the existing evidence;
the missing evidence needed to prove such divinity;
the implausibility of such divine activity; and
the cascading implications of accepting such evidence.
In addition, the Christian gospels themselves are suspect because of their sources, contradictions, and apologetics.
[quote]StephenD wrote:
Arguments Against Christianity
There are at least eight insurmountable problems within the extant evidence that each independently refute the Christian doctrine of a divine Jesus:
Jesus’ endorsement of the murderous immorality of Yahweh in the Torah;
Jesus’ doctrine of “eternal punishment” in the “eternal fire” of Hell;
Jesus’ failure to claim actual divinity;
Jesus’ failed prophecy of his imminent return;
Jesus’ failure to competently reveal his doctrines (concerning e.g. salvation, hell, divorce, circumcision, and diet) in his own written account or that of an eyewitness;
Jesus’ failure to perform miracles the accounts of which cannot be so easily explained as faith-healing, misinterpretation, exaggeration, and embellishment;
Jesus’ failure to attract significant notice (much less endorsement) in the only detailed contemporaneous history of first-century Palestine;
Jesus’ failure to recruit
anyone from his family,
any acquaintance from before his baptism,
a majority of Palestinian Jews, and even
some of those who heard his words and witnessed his alleged miracles.
An omnipotent omniscience benevolent deity competently attempting a revelation would have foreseen and corrected all of these problems. The existence of any one of them implies that Christian doctrine is false. The reasons not to believe the Christian doctrine of a divine Jesus can be divided into four categories:
the alternative naturalistic explanations of the existing evidence;
the missing evidence needed to prove such divinity;
the implausibility of such divine activity; and
the cascading implications of accepting such evidence.
In addition, the Christian gospels themselves are suspect because of their sources, contradictions, and apologetics.[/quote]
And here we…GO!
[quote]Brother Chris wrote: A long post revolving around this:
<<< The two, Paul and James, when it comes to Justification are talking about two different things of course. >>>[/quote]This post was not half bad overall Chris and I at least, have never said that the RCC teaches that salvation is by works alone. I defy you to show me where.
Not bad though overall except I disagree that Paul is restricting his application of law anywhere in his writings to the mosaic law in principle. Of course that is his most immediate application, but imagine asking Paul if there were some other works that could justify aside from what was in the law of Moses. Also, The several words that are used to describe new life in Christ and it’s fruits, while not identical, do come as a package. There is no such thing as justification apart from salvation or righteousness apart from sanctification or any others apart from all the rest. You have them all or you don’t have any though sanctification is a lifelong journey while salvation and regeneration are instantaneous and lead to the rest or are not genuine. To be somewhat imprecise.
I’m not getting into all the exegetical, expositional minutia, but in the end Paul is talking about justification before God and James is talking about justifying your justification before the world so to speak.
Works of righteousness of any kind contribute nothing whatever to one’s right standing with God, but are the inevitable fruit of a saved, sanctified, justified, regenerate heart. He who says he has come to know Him and does not keep His commandments is a liar says John who also said that it’s also a lie to claim you have no sin. Paul says they that do the works of the flesh (he has a list in Galatians 5) will not inherit the kingdom of God.
They are all evidences of an unchanged dead heart which when when observed as objects of flagrant open participation in someone are God ordained signs that they are probably still dead, at least for now. If they die that way they go to hell, but even the very worst can truly repent and be forgiven. It is not possible to out-sin the power of Christ’s blood and resurrection
[quote]forbes wrote:
When Jesus says “the Father is greater than I” and “do not worship me, but only God the Father” it is because when the preincarnate Son became man he had to submit himself every way that a man would, even though he still retained his divine nature. He had to do it to fulfill the law. It is when Christ was resurrected that he was glorified back into the state that he shared with the Father. Thats why before his resurrection Christ rebuked worship, but after his resurrection he accepted it (when Thomas declared “my Lord and my God”).
See Hebrews 2: 9-10 [/quote]
Bingo! A million theological Internetz for you.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote: A long post revolving around this:
<<< The two, Paul and James, when it comes to Justification are talking about two different things of course. >>>[/quote]This post was not half bad overall Chris and I at least, have never said that the RCC teaches that salvation is by works alone. I defy you to show me where.
Not bad though overall except I disagree that Paul is restricting his application of law anywhere in his writings to the mosaic law in principle. Of course that is his most immediate application, but imagine asking Paul if there were some other works that could justify aside from what was in the law of Moses. Also, The several words that are used to describe new life in Christ and it’s fruits, while not identical, do come as a package. There is no such thing as justification apart from salvation or righteousness apart from sanctification or any others apart from all the rest. You have them all or you don’t have any though sanctification is a lifelong journey while salvation and regeneration are instantaneous and lead to the rest or are not genuine. To be somewhat imprecise.
I’m not getting into all the exegetical, expositional minutia, but in the end Paul is talking about justification before God and James is talking about justifying your justification before the world so to speak.[/quote]
I don’t think James was talking about justification to the world, he was talking about those that are in Jesus’ presence are required to do works through Christ, which before we were not able to do any works that were not for ourselves. We had no resistance to the law of sin.
However, Paul states, “faith working through love” where it can be said that faith alone is insufficient to justify the sinner. If it stands by itself and fails to join with love in acts of generosity and service, it is empty and vain (1 Cor 13:2; Jas 2:14-26). The parallel passage in 1 Cor 7:19, which likewise asserts the irrelevance of circumcision, suggests that Paul associates the labor of faith and love with keeping the moral commandments of God. Love has precisely this focus in Pauline theology (Gal 5:13-14; Rom 13:8-10) (CCC 162, 1814).
Jesus fulfilled the the rituals within the Mosaic Laws; however, Jesus did leave us with sacraments which to fulfill with accord (the seven). Nevertheless, as Jesus points out to the young rich man that life of mediocrity is a wasted gift, and that we need to live life positively (or grand) and not just do what is asked of us, but do more than what is asked of us.
Paul disagrees with you, without works our faith is empty and vain, even as worthless as they seem next to the sacrifice. I’m not saying that man can live without sin, Catholics are not Pelagians. We don’t deny Christ’ sanctification, and that if we work real hard that we’ll go to Heaven. That is nonsense. And, anyone that thinks that should be punched in the face by St. Nickolaus again.
Now, you have to remember as my little friend said, that Saints aren’t born, they are made. Catholics as well as everyone else struggle with their sin, so they will not all of a sudden have none of those (immorality, impurity, licentiousness, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, anger, selfishness, dissension, party spirit, envy, drunkenness, carousing, and the like), that is why Jesus gave us the sacrament of penance, so that when we struggle and we fail we can ask Jesus for forgiveness and our entrance into heaven is not blocked (CCC 1470, 1855).
[quote]StephenD wrote:
Arguments Against Christianity
There are at least eight insurmountable problems within the extant evidence that each independently refute the Christian doctrine of a divine Jesus:
Jesus’ endorsement of the murderous immorality of Yahweh in the Torah;
Jesus’ doctrine of “eternal punishment” in the “eternal fire” of Hell;
Jesus’ failure to claim actual divinity;
Jesus’ failed prophecy of his imminent return;
Jesus’ failure to competently reveal his doctrines (concerning e.g. salvation, hell, divorce, circumcision, and diet) in his own written account or that of an eyewitness;
Jesus’ failure to perform miracles the accounts of which cannot be so easily explained as faith-healing, misinterpretation, exaggeration, and embellishment;
Jesus’ failure to attract significant notice (much less endorsement) in the only detailed contemporaneous history of first-century Palestine;
Jesus’ failure to recruit
anyone from his family,
any acquaintance from before his baptism,
a majority of Palestinian Jews, and even
some of those who heard his words and witnessed his alleged miracles.
An omnipotent omniscience benevolent deity competently attempting a revelation would have foreseen and corrected all of these problems. The existence of any one of them implies that Christian doctrine is false. The reasons not to believe the Christian doctrine of a divine Jesus can be divided into four categories:
the alternative naturalistic explanations of the existing evidence;
the missing evidence needed to prove such divinity;
the implausibility of such divine activity; and
the cascading implications of accepting such evidence.
In addition, the Christian gospels themselves are suspect because of their sources, contradictions, and apologetics.[/quote]
Okay, well…source?
"Actually if you read it, it says those that have passed before us sit at the feet of the throne of the Lamb and offer up other saints prayers. Not sure how you do not see that. "
there purpose is to worship God, we were created for that purpose, and thats what heaven will be.
“Why wouldn’t the dead that are close to the Lord not pray for us? Are they not Christians? Are they not righteous? Answer that.”
They dont pray because they are not concerned with the worries and cares of this world, that would cause worry and pain which the Bible teaches is not present in the kingdom of heaven.
"So since we have all sinned, Jesus sinned. How is it that he hasn’t if WE HAVE ALL SINNED? Is Jesus not human? Did Jesus not have a human will? "
Jesus was fully God and fully man, the Bible teaches this. that is why he was blameless, mary had a natural birth… Jesus was conceived supernaturally, not mary…
"I see what you mean, but Scripture also commands us to obey the teaching of the Apostles or Bishops as they are on par with the word of God. "
False, show me a verse
“No, because she also had other roles connected to Jesus.”
verse?
“I explained it Immaculate Conception, we just had the feast day the other day December 8th.”
tradition not scripture. St. Patricks day is on March 17th, so leprechauns must be real…
I see no specific teaching or the word Trinity anywhere."
the word isnt used but the idea of 3 in one is clearly represented in scripture.
"I never said the statue saved the people. I just said God’s power which he used the through the statue that they were to look at saved them. The statue itself did not inherently have powers. And, you still have to explain to me, as a Catholic, that I worship a statue, and that I think it is more than a symbol, that I think it is more than the same thing that a statue of Pres. Jefferson Davis is. "
You have statues of mary, you bow to them and pray to them… the greek and hebrew translation for the word worship.
a. Shachah - “to depress, i.e. prostrate (in homage to royalty or God): bow (self) down, crouch, fall down (flat), humbly beseech, do (make) obeisance, do reverence, make to stoop, worship.”
Three Greek words.
a. Proskuneo - “meaning to kiss, like a dog licking his master’s hand), to fawn or crouch to, homage (do reverence to,
adore): worship.” It occurs 59 times in the New Testament. It originally carried with it the idea of subjects falling down to kiss the ground before a king or kiss their feet.
b. Sebomai - “to reverence, hold in awe.” Used 10 times in the New Testament.
c. Latreuo - “to render religious service of homage.” Used 21 times in the New Testament.
isnt what your doing worshiping??
“Okay, well which of the 30,000 plus 1 of the Churches today is this Church”
it is those who worship and follow Christ alone… does the church of God have catholics in it? yes, protestant? yes, baptists? yes… your limiting salvation to a denomination, this is foolish.
“I never said a priest says something makes it scriptural”
you did here… “Scripture also commands us to obey the teaching of the Apostles or Bishops as they are on par with the word of God”
“Where did I say the Pope is king? I didn’t, trust me. If I had said the Pope is King, Tirib would have been blowing me up. I said he was the chief, I said he was the Captain. The Captain of the ship, which as we know Kings didn’t captain their own ships, they established Captains to follow their directions. Yes, you are misinterpreting.”
so we have kings on ships with captains but the kings are not there so the so the chief is in charge but the king still runs the ship? come on… Jesus is Lord, the pope is a man, lets leave the analogies that lack any scripture out of this, Im sure God, creator of the heavens and the earth, has the capabilities to run His own ship…
john 5:19"Then answered Jesus and said unto them, ‘Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He seeth the Father do: for what things he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.’"
the rock isnt peter! it the revelation that peter was given by God.
psalm 62:1-2"Truly my soul waiteth upon God: From Him cometh my salvation. He only is my Rock and my salvation; He is my defence; I shall
not be greatly moved."
your arguments don’t have Bible basis… its all tradition and instructions from the catholic religion… and you can trust men if you like, but id like to remind you of some things popes has said and done
“To enjoy oneself and to lie carnally with women or with boys is no more of a sin than rubbing one’s hands together.”
- Pope Boniface VIII
This the same Pope who issued the Unim Sanctum, Nov 18, 1302, which ends saying:
“Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” The Roman Pontiff was a sex pervert.
John XII Was killed by a jealous husband who found the pope in bed with his wife
Benedict XI was know to rape and murder, and then sold his position to some italian pope
pope Julius III made his teenaged gay love a cardinal
are these men really the captains of the church? I would argue if they were even Christians at all…
JESUS DID NOT FULFILL THE MESSIANIC PROPHECIES
What is the Messiah supposed to accomplish? The Bible says that he will:
A. Build the Third Temple (Ezekiel 37:26-28).
B. Gather all Jews back to the Land of Israel (Isaiah 43:5-6).
C. Usher in an era of world peace, and end all hatred, oppression, suffering and disease. As it says: “Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall man learn war anymore.” (Isaiah 2:4)
D. Spread universal knowledge of the God of Israel, which will unite humanity as one. As it says: “God will be King over all the world – on that day, God will be One and His Name will be One” (Zechariah 14:9).
The historical fact is that Jesus fulfilled none of these messianic prophecies.
Christians counter that Jesus will fulfill these in the Second Coming, but Jewish sources show that the Messiah will fulfill the prophecies outright, and no concept of a second coming exists.
JESUS DID NOT EMBODY THE PERSONAL QUALIFICATIONS OF MESSIAH
A. MESSIAH AS PROPHET
Jesus was not a prophet. Prophecy can only exist in Israel when the land is inhabited by a majority of world Jewry. During the time of Ezra (circa 300 BCE), when the majority of Jews refused to move from Babylon to Israel, prophecy ended upon the death of the last prophets – Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi.
Jesus appeared on the scene approximately 350 years after prophecy had ended.
B. DESCENDENT OF DAVID
The Messiah must be descended on his father’s side from King David (see Genesis 49:10 and Isaiah 11:1). According to the Christian claim that Jesus was the product of a virgin birth, he had no father – and thus could not have possibly fulfilled the messianic requirement of being descended on his father’s side from King David!
C. TORAH OBSERVANCE
The Messiah will lead the Jewish people to full Torah observance. The Torah states that all mitzvot remain binding forever, and anyone coming to change the Torah is immediately identified as a false prophet. (Deut. 13:1-4)
Throughout the New Testament, Jesus contradicts the Torah and states that its commandments are no longer applicable. (see John 1:45 and 9:16, Acts 3:22 and 7:37)
MISTRANSLATED VERSES “REFERRING” TO JESUS
Biblical verses can only be understood by studying the original Hebrew text – which reveals many discrepancies in the Christian translation.
A. VIRGIN BIRTH
The Christian idea of a virgin birth is derived from the verse in Isaiah 7:14 describing an “alma” as giving birth. The word “alma” has always meant a young woman, but Christian theologians came centuries later and translated it as “virgin.” This accords Jesus’ birth with the first century pagan idea of mortals being impregnated by gods.
B. CRUCIFIXION
The verse in Psalms 22:17 reads: “Like a lion, they are at my hands and feet.” The Hebrew word ki-ari (like a lion) is grammatically similar to the word “gouged.” Thus Christianity reads the verse as a reference to crucifixion: “They pierced my hands and feet.”
C. SUFFERING SERVANT
Christianity claims that Isaiah chapter 53 refers to Jesus, as the “suffering servant.”
In actuality, Isaiah 53 directly follows the theme of chapter 52, describing the exile and redemption of the Jewish people. The prophecies are written in the singular form because the Jews (“Israel”) are regarded as one unit. The Torah is filled with examples of the Jewish nation referred to with a singular pronoun.
Ironically, Isaiah’s prophecies of persecution refer in part to the 11th century when Jews were tortured and killed by Crusaders who acted in the name of Jesus.
From where did these mistranslations stem? St. Gregory, 4th century Bishop of Nanianzus, wrote: “A little jargon is all that is necessary to impose on the people. The less they comprehend, the more they admire.”
[quote]brandonk87 wrote:
St. Patricks day is on March 17th, so leprechauns must be real…
[/quote]
Sorry, I don’t deal with ignorant fucks. You just crossed the line and earned yourself the ignore list. For your information, you’re a bigoted asshole and fucking leprechauns do not have anything to do with St. Patrick, 'a fucking narrowback know nothing.
Go mbi scian id shuilibh is dealg ucaire id thoin thiar
[quote]StephenD wrote:
MISTRANSLATED VERSES “REFERRING” TO JESUS
Biblical verses can only be understood by studying the original Hebrew text – which reveals many discrepancies in the Christian translation.
A. VIRGIN BIRTH
The Christian idea of a virgin birth is derived from the verse in Isaiah 7:14 describing an “alma” as giving birth. The word “alma” has always meant a young woman, but Christian theologians came centuries later and translated it as “virgin.” This accords Jesus’ birth with the first century pagan idea of mortals being impregnated by gods.
B. CRUCIFIXION
The verse in Psalms 22:17 reads: “Like a lion, they are at my hands and feet.” The Hebrew word ki-ari (like a lion) is grammatically similar to the word “gouged.” Thus Christianity reads the verse as a reference to crucifixion: “They pierced my hands and feet.”
C. SUFFERING SERVANT
Christianity claims that Isaiah chapter 53 refers to Jesus, as the “suffering servant.”
In actuality, Isaiah 53 directly follows the theme of chapter 52, describing the exile and redemption of the Jewish people. The prophecies are written in the singular form because the Jews (“Israel”) are regarded as one unit. The Torah is filled with examples of the Jewish nation referred to with a singular pronoun.
Ironically, Isaiah’s prophecies of persecution refer in part to the 11th century when Jews were tortured and killed by Crusaders who acted in the name of Jesus.
From where did these mistranslations stem? St. Gregory, 4th century Bishop of Nanianzus, wrote: “A little jargon is all that is necessary to impose on the people. The less they comprehend, the more they admire.”
[/quote]
Oy vey, my grandmother is turning in her grave.
Ephesians 4:29
"Don’t use foul or abusive language. Let everything you say be good and helpful, so that your words will be an encouragement to those who hear them.’
theres no need to set a bad example here, I was just making a point that is something not in the Bible it holds no merit and is only tradition
Chris, do you believe all of the popes of the Catholic church will be saved? Even the gay ones? Just curious 
[quote]forbes wrote:
When Jesus says “the Father is greater than I” and “do not worship me, but only God the Father” it is because when the preincarnate Son became man he had to submit himself every way that a man would, even though he still retained his divine nature. He had to do it to fulfill the law. It is when Christ was resurrected that he was glorified back into the state that he shared with the Father. Thats why before his resurrection Christ rebuked worship, but after his resurrection he accepted it (when Thomas declared “my Lord and my God”).
See Hebrews 2: 9-10 [/quote]
Let’s take a deeper look at this verse and other verses talking about Jesus in the heavenly position. First off, what do you mean by “retain his divine nature” and yet at the same time “submit himself every way that a man would”?
[quote]forlife wrote:
Chris, do you believe all of the popes of the Catholic church will be saved? Even the gay ones? Just curious :)[/quote]
You know the Bible forlife, you quote it all the time when you thinkit suits your needs. But I’ll help you out here:
[b]1 Corinthians 6:9
Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders.[/b]
They used a different word for “homosexual” back in the day when the Bible was written but it means the same thing.
[quote]forlife wrote:
Chris, do you believe all of the popes of the Catholic church will be saved? Even the gay ones? Just curious :)[/quote]
Have no clue what you are talking about specifically. Explain, please.
Here is a list of Popes & anti-popes, some are canonized some are not (I don’t know of an anti-pope that is Saint). Being a Pope doesn’t give you a free ride to Heaven, you still have to be right with God during your last moments. We’d hope that being in such a position as Pope, would almost force their hand to be right with God, but God can use blatant sinners to do good. You can see that in Judges 17 (I believe, I’m on my phone) where one of Israel’s judges (who is in a position to act as God in the sense of making decisions for God) was not a good man, although he did rule Israel justly…supposedly. He basically let a mob of men rape his wife (the actual text says concubine, but legally it was his wife) instead of fending for himself and his family and his hosts.
Chris, I was referring to the last few lines of Brandon’s post. Do you think those gay popes will be saved?
[quote]forlife wrote:
Chris, I was referring to the last few lines of Brandon’s post. Do you think those gay popes will be saved?[/quote]
Didn’t get that far, if you want to give me those names so I can know who you are talking about.
By the way, if anyone wants to read a really good article on the Immaculate Conception since it was this past Wednesday check out: Catholic and Enjoying It!: In Honor of the Immaculate Conception