Guide Jesus Uninterrupted: The Most Important 4% Of The Bible

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Jesus Uninterrupted: The Most Important 4% Of The Bible file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Jesus Uninterrupted: The Most Important 4% Of The Bible book. Happy reading Jesus Uninterrupted: The Most Important 4% Of The Bible Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Jesus Uninterrupted: The Most Important 4% Of The Bible at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Jesus Uninterrupted: The Most Important 4% Of The Bible Pocket Guide.
Las entrevistas como instrumento de evaluación en el TDAH
Contents:
  1. Jesus Uninterrupted: The Most Important 4% Of The Bible by G.L. Anderson
  2. Table of contents
  3. How Palestinian Activists Manipulate Western Christians

However, due to the promises of restoration made in the Bible to the Jewish people, those who claim to believe in the Bible are obligated to answer the question of whether modern Israel is the fulfillment of prophecy. All three monotheistic faiths, Judaism, Christianity and Islam, prophesy events which will unfold at the end of time. After the destruction of the Temple, and the exile of the Jewish people, the complexity of these predictions became compounded by centuries of commentary and disagreements about how or whether the Jewish people would return to the land.

The dominant view within Orthodox Judaism was that the nation of Israel could not be reconstituted without the Messiah. Using Jewish texts, we demonstrate that this concept is against the Torah and has been opposed by rabbis in all generations. The Catholic Church developed replacement theology, which taught that God was finished with the Jewish people and replaced them with the Church. This destructive idea espouses the idea that the promises, covenants, and blessings ascribed to Israel in Scriptures have been taken away from the Jews and given to the church.

There is also an Islamic version of supersessionism. Central to Islam is the doctrine that Mohammed is the last prophet of God, superseding all others, from Abraham to Moses and Jesus. Thus, Koranic law superseded Jewish law and created a view of Islamic triumph over Judaism. Thus, the recreation of Israel was a slap in the face to centuries of religious doctrine which did not anticipate a secular state of Israel. Faith communities were left with three options, 1 reject Israel as the fulfillment of biblical prophecy, 2 reject their own doctrine, or 3 tweak their former doctrines to better fit historical reality.

For example, some Orthodox Jews modified their view, allowing that modern day secular Israel is a stepping stone toward the fulfillment of the messianic hope. Christian Zionists believe that modern Israel is the fulfillment of prophecy. Christian Palestinianism also claims that modern Israel is not the fulfillment of biblical prophecy. As a religious-political movement, Christian Palestinianism asserts that the ancient biblical nation of Israel is not the same entity as the modern state of Israel. The goal of Christian Palestinianism is to convince the world that the promises made in the Bible to ancient Israel do not apply to modern Israel, that God is finished with the Jewish nation.

The godfather of Christian Palestinianism is Rev. Naim Ateek, an Arab-Israeli citizen who self-identifies as a Palestinian. Sabeel has become one of the leading international headquarters to spread anti-zionism into many western churches. Ateek is calculating and has devoted his life to developing a strategy to separate the Bible from Zionism.

This outreach should aim at… de-Zionizing the Bible. Over the last couple of decades these Palestinians and western theologians have created a new systematic reading of Scripture to attack every foundation which can be used to support Israel. In other words, the best solution is for Israel to disappear. Another major headquarter promoting Christian Palestinianism is Bethlehem Bible College, founded in by local Arab pastors under the leadership of Bishara Awad.

Another lead organization is Kairos Palestine, a coalition of Palestinian Christians. These Palestinian groups collaborate with western theologians, pastors and activists, attempting to spread their message throughout churches. Kairos Palestine promotes the boycott movement against Israel in major American churches. Millions of Christians travel to Israel to visit the Holy Land. The standard tours bring Christians to see the holy sites, such as the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem.

Palestinian Christians have established a number of Palestinian social justice tour groups, which piggyback on the tourism industry. These tours visit places where Jesus walked, as well as Palestinian areas. The Palestinian network has worldwide influence through the World Council of Churches WCC , which represents roughly million church members. There are seven major pillars of both Judaism and Christianity which had to be attacked in order to argue that the modern nation of Israel should be destroyed. In the Jewish Bible, God makes an eternal covenant with the Jewish people, promising them the land of Israel in perpetuity.

The Bible actually precludes the possibility that the land could belong to any other group of people. Trying to deny this fundamental thought in the Jewish Bible would be like denying that Jesus is the Messiah in the Christian Bible, or that Muhammad is the received prophet in the Koran. These Christian Palestinian activists are fully aware that many western Christians support Israel, based on the biblical promises made to the Jewish people.

If they are going to cut off this support, they must find a way to get around the Bible verses which promise the land to the Jewish people for eternity: the Bible itself is the greatest barrier standing in their way. Thus, the Scriptures themselves have to be circumvented. How to do this? By waging an attack against the major foundational pillars of the Bible.

First attack: The Jewish Bible is not a reliable source of history. This attack is done in two forms. First, by a flat out denial of the historical reliability of Bible accounts. Second, by arguing that the Bible was not inspired by God, but rather, is a collection of Jewish writings from different periods of Jewish history, written by men to justify their own ambitions to conquer land.

Second attack: The Jewish people are not chosen. In the Torah, God chose the Jewish people to be in a special covenant. Grey declared that the goal of Sabeel is to convince Jewish people that they should not view themselves as chosen. In order to undermine the belief that Jewish people are chosen, these theologians do not necessarily have to defeat the claim that Jewish people were chosen in the past, rather they only have to subvert the claim that Jews are still chosen in the modern era.

Brueggemann holds that it is true that the Jewish people were chosen, but that the latter prophets changed their minds on the issue. Brueggemann develops a theory that the early books of the Bible depict only Israel as chosen, while the latter prophetic tradition begins to depict many nations as chosen.


  • Learning Tools.
  • My Home in Spanish.
  • MORE COMMANDERS LOST TREASURES YOU CAN FIND IN THE STATE OF MAINE - FULL COLOR EDITION!
  • Bible Verses about Jesus - ypyxogozynyh.ml.
  • Bible Verses About Guidance.
  • How Credit Card Debt Settlement Affects Your Credit Report And What You Can Do About It;
  • ABC Myths, legends, lies?

Brueggemann even goes so far as to argue that the latter prophets rebuked Israel for believing they were uniquely chosen by God. Third Attack: The land of Israel is not promised to the Jewish people. In the Jewish Bible, God makes an eternal covenant with the Jewish people, and the land of Israel is promised to them for eternity. Christian commentaries debate whether the Jews will return to the land based on accepting Christ, but there is no history of debate over whether the land is promised to the Jews.

Not surprisingly, they conclude that it cannot. Ateek also develops a line of reasoning that the Hebrew Bible started with a tribal mentality but then progressed to an inclusive mentality. This transformation continued in The New Testament, which he argues called on Jewish people to move past the belief that they require a specific land, and replaced it with the Kingdom of God. Fourth Attack: There is no promise of a prophetic restoration of Israel. Yet, Christian Palestinianism simply dismisses these prophecies, purporting that the Jewish people have not been prophetically restored to their promised land, but rather that the Jews stole the land from the Palestinians and remain as foreign occupiers.

Catholic theologians did not invent a false history about the ethnic identity of Christ, or rewrite his birthplace, yet Christian Palestinianism literally denies the historical account in the Christian Bible, as well as the ethnic identity and national homeland of Jesus. In order to do this, Palestinian theologians have devised a ridiculous false revisionist history: they argue that the Bible was written in Palestine, Jesus was a Palestinian, his first disciples were Palestinians, and that the Palestinians are the true protectors of the holy sites on behalf of the Christian world.

In their view, Jews do not appear in the Christian Bible. Seventh Attack: Christ would only be on the side of the Palestinians. The goal of these theologians is to deter Christian support for the state of Israel and redirect that support to the Palestinians. The political dimension is a Palestinian adaptation of Christian liberation theology. The best known form of liberation theology developed within the Catholic Church in Latin America in the s.

Sadly, while liberation theology was concerned with liberating the economically oppressed from poverty, Christian Palestinian liberation theology is concerned with liberating Palestine from the Jews. In summary: One difficulty for these theologians is that they repeatedly try to market themselves as different from the history of Christian anti-semitic predecessors. In order to sound like they are not singling out the Jewish faith for discrimination, Christian Palestinianism proposes a universal theological reason for why the Abrahamic covenant no longer applies to the Jews.

It devises an interpretation that God has rejected all nationalism. If this is so, God has not rejected only the nation of Israel, rather God has rejected all nations. Four contradictions within Christian Palestinianism which reveal that its goal is only to harm Israel:. First, Christian Palestinianism argues that the Jewish belief in election is immoral, and that Jewish people should abandon the belief that they are chosen. However, both Christianity and Islam have a parallel concept of election.

Second, these theologians argue that the true message of both the Jewish Bible and the Christian Bible is the call to abandon nationalism. Yet, members of Sabeel are located in multiple countries throughout Europe and America and they do not call for their own countries to be dismantled. For example, Dr. He has traveled throughout both America and Germany preaching that Jews need to repent of the sin of nationalism.

However, if nationalism is a sin in itself, then he should have preached that the Germans need to repent of nationalism and begin by destroying Germany. There is a glaring contradiction between the written message of these theologians and their action: although they write about a universal message that nationalism in itself is a transgression, when they preach in churches they only proclaim that Jewish nationalism is a sin against God.

In a greater act of hypocrisy, Sabeel supports Palestinian nationalism. Third, although these theologians argue that the ancient Jews and the modern Jews are not the same entity, they invariably use the Bible to judge the present-day Jewish people. And there appeared before them Elijah and Moses, who were talking with Jesus. Let us put up three shelters—one for you, one for Moses and one for Elijah.

Listen to him! Suddenly, when they looked around, they no longer saw anyone with them except Jesus. As they were coming down the mountain, Jesus gave them orders not to tell anyone what they had seen until the Son of Man had risen from the dead. This is one of the most recognizable examples of mythology in the gospels, for it is a transparent effort to repeat another mythological event told in the Book of Exodus, Chapter 34, where Moses ascends a mountain to receive the Ten Commandments and returns with a radiant face.

The author of Mark was attempting to paint Jesus as the new Moses. This episode was repeated in the Gospels of Luke and Matthew, but notably and significantly, not in the Gospel of John. This is especially embarrassing to Christians who naively claim that the Apostle John wrote the Gospel of John, considering that the transfiguration stories in Mark, Luke, and Matthew all claim that John was a witness to this miracle. If Jesus was God as claimed by nearly all Christians, then he had the power to avoid being arrested and crucified.

Therefore his crucifixion was a suicide, which is a sin according to Christian doctrine. Not only did Jesus not take actions fully within his capability to avoid being killed, he even predicted his death on multiple occasions, indicating that his suicide was premeditated. Essentially, what Jesus did is equivalent to somebody brandishing a gun and threatening police so they can be shot- suicide by cops, as it were. Keep in mind that this allegation is aimed only at the Christian concept of Jesus. Secular historians believe that Jesus never predicted his death and did not seek nor expect his crucifixion.

Christians will claim that Jesus could be excused for failing to take actions to protect his life because it was a cosmic necessity for him to die so that sins could be forgiven. In the 13th Chapter of Mark, verses 5 to 37, Jesus is quoted to deliver a word uninterrupted monologue, discussing the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple and the end of times. The author of Mark never met Jesus, was writing approximately 40 years after Jesus allegedly gave this speech, and was writing in Greek instead of the language that Jesus spoke, Aramaic. Every word that is recorded in the gospels, and especially anything attributed to a quote by Jesus, is taken as sacrosanct by Christians and is used to formulate immutable doctrines, that is, for all times.

The author of Mark, who undoubtedly did not have this speech available to him from a reliable source, almost assuredly made up major parts of it, just as would any writer of fiction. So, this means that contemporary Christians are basing their beliefs on the imagination of a 1st Century man. Christian apologists run around this problem by invoking magic- they claim that the Holy Spirit inspired and, in fact, dictated this speech to Mark, and did so in a manner verbatim to the way Jesus delivered it.

Aside from the improbability of this explanation, it is easily refuted by pointing out the numerous contradictions in the gospels as firm counter-evidence. The Holy Spirit, if actually doing this, would not have made these mistakes. During the time that Christianity and other religions evolved there was a complete lack of understanding of the scientific basis of human psychosis, or psychotic episodes, such as were manifest, for example, in epilepsy, waking dreams, visions, revelations, schizophrenia, hearing voices, hallucinations, catatonia, post-traumatic stress disorder, and delirium.

Persons affected by these afflictions were either thought to be infiltrated by evil spirits or else they were being enlightened by divine beings, angels, saints, or gods, and receiving revelations. With everyone in those times lacking a scientific understanding of these phenomena, the experiences of these episodes were recounted and passed along as windows into the unseen world, and they formed much of the basis of belief in supernatural agents. These erroneous ideas coalesced to form the basis of various religious faiths.

The same types of psychosis occurring today is rightfully seen as being restricted to the brains of those affected, and not evidence of an unseen, supernatural, behind-the-scenes world. This is to say, if the people of the First Century had known what we know today, Christianity likely would have never originated. But these terms as they were used by Jews in the First Century did not mean what they are taken to mean today. Jesus does say many things that are easily taken out of context—millennia later.

Are these priests and ministers claiming to be God? But they are standing as representatives of God—and the Jesus character saw himself as doing exactly the same. Recalibrating the meaning of this terminology implies rather convincingly that Jesus never claimed to be God. The closest he comes to doing so in the final and least reliable gospel, John. But what we can be assured of is that if Jesus actually claimed to be God, this proclamation would have been prominently documented in all of the gospels. It would have been just as important as documenting the crucifixion and the resurrection.

Any attempt to shoehorn Christianity into the fabric of reality inevitably runs into insurmountable problems. Christianity is stuck in a static theology that is being progressively overshadowed by an evolving ethos, making it look more and more irrelevant and inauthentic. Whenever an atheist mentions that many Christians are converting to atheism, Christians will counter with stories of atheists who have became Christians.

But this is a false equivalency. If Christianity is true, then dedicated followers have a supernatural source reinforcing their beliefs, making apostasy unlikely. However, if atheism is true, atheists have no such agency supporting their belief, making conversion less problematic. Here is a list of former Christian leaders who have recently become outspoken atheists:. It is significant that a large number of pastors and evangelical Christians have departed from their faith. As an analogy, suppose there are two groups of people, one believing in evolution and one believing in creationism.

Publisher Description

Given that new evidence supporting evolution is accumulating every year, is it more likely that evolutionists would become creationists or that creationists would become evolutionists? The growing evidence for evolution is analogous to the supernatural agency that Christians would enjoy if Christianity was true. Many scientifically-literate Christians hold on to their faith while admitting to the truth of biological evolution. This is actually an untenable position. The New Testament scriptures reveal that Christianity is dependent on the Adam and Eve story, not biological evolution, being the literal truth.

If evolution is true, then Adam would have had a father as well. In this verse, Jesus is showing that he believed in the initial creation story, including the first man, Adam, as a literal historical figure. Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who is a pattern of the one to come. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. This is an unambiguous statement that ties the sacrifice of Jesus to the sin of Adam.

This verse cements Christian theology to a historical Adam, and directly ties Jesus the last Adam to this figure. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. Here, a doctrine of men possessing hierarchy over women is shown to be a consequence of a literal belief in the events discussed in Genesis concerning the Garden of Eden. This is yet another reference to Adam as if he actually lived and was the first human being.

What should be gleaned from this discussion is that one of the foundations that Christianity rests upon is the assumption of the literal truth of the Garden of Eve story and the creation of Adam as the first human. For those who accept the overwhelming evidence for biological evolution, this foundational pillar is removed and Christianity suffers a serious blow to its authenticity. After his suffering, he presented himself to them and gave many convincing proofs that he was alive. He appeared to them over a period of forty days and spoke about the kingdom of God. This verse offers a definite statement that Jesus stayed around for 40 days after the resurrection and before his ascension.

This immediately raises a question of whether Jesus was susceptible to being taken back to the cross as it would have been hard to keep his appearances to greater than people on one occasion from becoming known to his Roman prosecutors. The scriptures give no clue as to whether this was an ongoing concern. In the Gospel of Mark the earliest of the gospels , forgoing the forged ending after Verse , the only mention of a resurrection is that the tomb was empty. There is nothing that speaks of Jesus tarrying for 40 days, and this is highly suspicious, given the extraordinary theological significance of that time period.

In the Gospel of Matthew, there is no description of an ascension, just a short sermon that Jesus delivered to his disciples. Once again, it is strange to have ended the book so abruptly and without referencing what must have been a lot of important events that would have happened in the ensuing 40 days. In the Gospel of Luke, Jesus makes a confusing incognito appearance to two travelers on the Road to Emmaus, then appears to the his disciples, exhorts them, eats a fish, then leads them to Bethany where he lifts off to heaven.

The entire episode appears to have happened within one or two days. In the Gospel of John, Jesus appears to Mary Magdalene and then to the disciples, apparently on the first day after the resurrection. Then, one week later, he appears to the doubting Thomas. What can be seen from this is that the time period from the resurrection to the ascension as described in the gospels changes over time as the legend began to be refined, as follows:. As time went by, scriptures had Jesus staying around for a longer period of time.

After that, the legend grew and the time gap finally became the currently accepted doctrine of a day period. Christians often claim that they can talk to God and actually hear his reply, not as an audibly recordible voice, but as an inner silent presence.

This, they believe, is evidence that their God is real. The problem with this assertion is that what they are experiencing is not unique to their faith. Followers of other faiths report the same scenario. One example is provided at this website:. I ask Him something and supplicate Him and He answers in words full of power. If this should happen a thousand times, He does not fail to answer. In His words, He discloses wonderful hidden matters and displays scenes of extraordinary powers till He makes it clear that He alone is the One Who should be called God.

He accepts prayers and intimates their acceptance. He resolves great difficulties and through repeated supplications, revives those who are sick unto death. He discloses all these designs in advance through His word which relate to future events. He proves that He is the God of heaven and earth. People who follow Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, and all other theistic faiths make the claim of being able to communicate with their god or gods. This strongly implies that all people who are experiencing a dialogue with a god are instead participating is a self-made illusion.

They are, in effect, talking to themselves, and hearing replies that correspond to their innate preferences. Christians who claim that they are having a relationship with God are actually having a relationship with themselves. Christians often state that the truth of the Christian religion relies on the historical resurrection of Jesus. The problem is that, according to the Bible, being raised from the dead was not an unusual occurrence and normally did not carry any theological importance. Here is a list of people raised from the dead as documented in the Bible:.

The Bible errs in failing to make Jesus the only person to be raised from the dead. The Sixth Commandment Exodus is one that has the authors of various versions of the Bible wrapped around the axle. New International Version. New Living Translation. English Standard Version. New American Standard Bible. King James Bible. Holman Christian Standard Bible. International Standard Version.

JPS Tanakh Thou shalt not murder. Thou shalt not commit adultery. Thou shalt not steal. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour. New American Standard Jubilee Bible American King James Version. American Standard Version. Douay-Rheims Bible. Darby Bible Translation. English Revised Version. World English Bible. God is supposedly not the author of confusion, but in this case, that is exactly what happened. Here are two examples:.

Then when Herod saw that he had been tricked by the magi, he became very enraged, and sent and slew all the male children who were in Bethlehem and all its vicinity, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had determined from the magi. For this reason that field has been called the Field of Blood to this day. If Jesus had been the Jewish Messiah, the scriptures would have aligned and fulfilled themselves and the Jews would have accepted him wholesale. Christianity claims that God created us and wants us to worship him. But he has also created a judgment system that leaves us with no viable choice.

They must comply or face severe punishment. They have no choice or voice in this matter. Similarly the slave butters up his master, saying lies about his admiration for him, all in an effort to avoid being beaten. This is where Christianity fails a logical test. We should expect the Holy Bible to contain great wisdom from the infinitely intelligent, all-knowing god, so whatever we can glean from its pages, we should take heed, and use this wisdom to solve our problems- one of which is leprosy, or other skin diseases.

Luckily, the Bible contains the means of curing this affliction:. Then the priest shall order that one of the birds be killed over fresh water in a clay pot. He is then to take the live bird and dip it, together with the cedar wood, the scarlet yarn and the hyssop, into the blood of the bird that was killed over the fresh water. Seven times he shall sprinkle the one to be cleansed of the defiling disease, and then pronounce them clean.

After that, he is to release the live bird in the open fields. No one today, except perhaps some crazy fundamentalists, would attempt to cure leprosy using this method. Why is that? Because we understand the underlying cause of the affliction and further realize that magical ceremonies will do nothing to alleviate the problem.

Most Christians will dismiss this portion of their Bible, simply ignoring it, but not realize at the same time that they are tacitly admitting that their God never gave this prescription in the first place- for if he did, he would be peddling a hocus-pocus scam. They would have to acknowledge that God allowed this embarrassment to his intelligence to be documented for all future generations. It is easier to remain blissfully unaware. Slaves, in reverent fear of God submit yourselves to your masters, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh.

For it is commendable if someone bears up under the pain of unjust suffering because they are conscious of God. But how is it to your credit if you receive a beating for doing wrong and endure it? But if you suffer for doing good and you endure it, this is commendable before God. To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps.

The first problem with this scripture is that it condones slavery, which we should all know that a real god would condemn. But it goes much further and says that being beaten for doing nothing wrong is something that God would appreciate. It also gives tacit license to slave owners as well as others in positions of authority to mistreat their underlings.

So the real question is how could such an immoral, unethical, misguided, barbaric, unreasonable, absurd, cruel, inhuman, and uncivilized scripture make it into the Holy Bible? Much less in the supposedly more sensible and humane New Testament? The answer is simple- a god had nothing to do with it. According to Christianity, God made a set of laws for his chosen people, the Jews.

Beyond that, there is considerable controversy. Do these laws still apply today? If so, do they only apply to Jews, and not Christians? There are Christians who will vigorously debate both sides of these two questions. This has to make an objective observer wonder- how could God have allowed such confusion to exist over such a critical question? The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presses into it. And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one pronunciation mark of the law to fail. Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. It is also the smallest letter. If you can imagine a tiny letter with a slightly visible decorative mark. Tittle is used by Greek grammarians of the accents and diacritical points. It means the little lines or projections by which the Hebrew letters differ from each other. One example would be the difference between the letter L and I. The difference is only one small mark. It is interesting that the Jewish scribes who copied the MT Massoretic Text of the Hebrew Bible scrolls paid the greatest attention to the minutiae of detail and such marks attached to each consonant throughout the entire text.

They even numbered every letter, word, sentence, paragraph, chapter, section, and scroll to insure that the total equalled that of the text being copied before allowing it to enter the holy synagogue. The meaning of the passage is very clear. In fact when heaven and earth are replaced by a new heaven and earth, the Word of the Lord will have accomplished its purpose and will be fulfilled in every detail even to the very letter.

The other question is how can Christians claim to be followers of Jesus if they ignore this very clear doctrinal statement? Thus, most Christians are honoring convenience over scriptural command, and this is a fatal contradiction for the faith. He has written numerous articles for Freethought Today, an American freethought newspaper. You expect me to believe Jesus was born of a virgin impregnated by a ghost? Do you believe all the crazy tales of ancient religions? Julius Caesar was reportedly born of a virgin; Roman historian Seutonius said Augustus bodily rose to heaven when he died; and Buddha was supposedly born speaking.

Why do you expect me to swallow the fables of Christianity? If you believe these stories, then you are the one with the problem, not me. These myths violate natural law, contradict science, and fail to correspond with reality or logic. If you are so gullible, then you are like the child who believes the older brother who says there is a monster in the hallway. But there is nothing to be afraid of; go turn on the light and look for yourself. If Christianity were simply untrue I would not be too concerned.

Santa is untrue, but it is a harmless myth which people outgrow. But Christianity, besides being false, is also abhorrent. I would not want to live in the same neighborhood with such a creature! The biblical god is a macho male warrior. Is that nice? Would you want to live next door to such a person? And Jesus is a chip off the old block.

He believed in demons, angels and spirits. He never denounced the subjugation of slaves or women. Women were excluded as disciples and as guests at his heavenly table. Except for hell he introduced nothing new to ethics or philosophy. He was disrespectful of his mother and brothers; he said we should hate our parents and desert our families.

I came not to send peace, but a sword. He stole a horse. I also find Christianity to be morally repugnant. The concepts of original sin, depravity, substitutionary forgiveness, intolerance, eternal punishment, and humble worship are all beneath the dignity of intelligent human beings and conflict with the values of kindness and reason. They are barbaric ideas for primitive cultures cowering in fear and ignorance. Finally, Christianity is harmful.

More people have been killed in the name of a god than for any other reason. The Church has a shameful, bloody history of Crusades, Inquisitions, witch-burnings, heresy trials, American colonial intolerance, disrespect of indigenous traditions such as American Indians , support of slavery, and oppression of women. Religion also poses a danger to mental health, damaging self-respect, personal responsibility, and clarity of thought.

Do you see why I do not respect the biblical message? It is an insulting bag of nonsense. You have every right to torment yourself with such insanity — but leave me out of it. I have better things to do with my life. This letter destroys every shred of respectability that Christianity generally enjoys.

It would be difficult for Christians to read it and not come away with a chink in their faith. Christianity as well as other religions begin with two assumptions- there is a god or gods, and the god or gods are good. The following discussion of this point is provided at this website:. If there were a God, we would have a few choices regarding the basic facts about him. This being would most likely represent the entire spectrum from male to female and everything in between, or possibly something else entirely.

Who knows? Of greater importance, though, is this question: Is this God involved in the doings of the Universe he created, or did he create it and then step away from it, choosing to be distant and detached? If we go with the latter, the idea of trying to discuss this God becomes moot.

Because you would have no idea what this God was like; any discussion would be pure speculation. If they are bad, if he is actually an evil God who creates things simply to enjoy the ensuing anguish, then we are all fucked anyway and there is little more to discuss other than basic survival and possible tactics of opposition. However, if he is a good God with good intentions, what then? The terrible reality of suffering in this Universe is then explained away, cataloged into tidy little compartments of theological ideas which do wonders for the conscience of these believers but do nothing for the rest of us who demand better answers.

The a priori assumption that any god that exists must be good is a fatal problem with all religions. Honor your father and your mother, so that you may live long in the land the Lord your God is giving you. Although on the surface this sounds like a sensible rule, it actually lacks the depth of wisdom expected of a celestial deity. Honor cannot be bestowed automatically by an honest intellect. Intellectually honest people can honor only those who, in their opinion, warrant their honor.

The biologic fact of fatherhood and motherhood does not in and of itself warrant honor. Until very recently parenthood was not a matter of choice. All of us know children who have been abused, beaten or neglected by their parents. What is the basis for honor there? How does the daughter honor a father who sexually molests her? This commandment has been used by inferior parents who abuse their children physically and emotionally to demand the honor they feel is mandated by God. And It gives them a license to act in less than honorable ways towards their children.

There are several things we know about the Jewish Messiah- he would come once, not twice, and he would establish an earthly kingdom based in Jerusalem. Jesus failed on both counts and thus was rejected by the Jews. A century later, someone came along who came much closer to fulfilling the messianic criteria, as discussed in the following excerpt:.

Jews do not believe that Jesus was the mashiach. Assuming that he existed, and assuming that the Christian scriptures are accurate in describing him both matters that are debatable , he simply did not fulfill the mission of the mashiach as it is described in the biblical passages cited above. Jesus did not do any of the things that the scriptures said the messiah would do. On the contrary, another Jew born about a century later came far closer to fulfilling the messianic ideal than Jesus did.

His name was Shimeon ben Kosiba, known as Bar Kokhba son of a star , and he was a charismatic, brilliant, but brutal warlord. Rabbi Akiba, one of the greatest scholars in Jewish history, believed that Bar Kokhba was the mashiach. He resumed sacrifices at the site of the Temple and made plans to rebuild the Temple. He established a provisional government and began to issue coins in its name.

This is what the Jewish people were looking for in a mashiach; Jesus clearly does not fit into this mold. Ultimately, however, the Roman Empire crushed his revolt and killed Bar Kokhba. After h is death, all acknowledged that he was not the mashiach. This is termed dualism. However, research conducted on split-brain patients provides convincing evidence that this hypothetical soul does not exist.

Many of our readers — especially among the regulars at Uncommon Descent — are substance dualists.


  1. Mine, mine, mine.
  2. Heart of the Warrior (All the Kings Men Book 2).
  3. Starcrossed.
  4. Even stronger evidence against the dualist position is provided by split-brain patients. There is a procedure, the corpus callosotomy , that disconnects the two hemispheres so that epileptic seizures cannot spread from one to the other. The hemispheres are only disconnected; neither is removed. If there were a single, immaterial mind, it would know what both hemispheres know.

    As a dualist, how do you explain this? The left hemisphere controls the right half of the body, and vice-versa. One patient was seen to pick up a cigarette with her right hand and place it in her mouth. Her left hand plucked it out and threw it away before the right hand could light it. In another case, a man attacked his wife with one arm while defending her with the other. If a single immaterial mind were running the show, this would not happen. How do you explain this within the dualist framework? In this instance, scientific evidence directly contradicts the implied claims of Christianity.

    The duelist hypothesis is shown to be false. According to the Bible, Jesus was travelling around preaching a somewhat altered form of Judaism, one that conflicted conspicuously with the doctrine promoted by the most formidable leaders of the faith, the Sadducees and the Pharisees. So, it was inevitable that some would reject his message, just like any Christian today would reject a self-assigned prophet advancing a novel form of Christianity. Given this, it is important to acknowledge how Jesus reportedly reacted to those who rejected his message:.

    Yet be sure of this: The kingdom of God has come near. Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago, sitting in sackcloth and ashes. But it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon at the judgment than for you. And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted to the heavens? No, you will go down to Hades. The story described here, and also in Matthew , shows Jesus reacting in exactly the manner expected of a street corner evangelist if he was being ignored or rejected.

    It completely ignores the sensible human tendency to be skeptical of claims presented without compelling evidence. This episode exposes Jesus as a frustrated human, and not a god as claimed by Christians. In John , we read about how God the Father controls who is able to come to Jesus this comes directly after Jesus introduced the cannibalistic requirement to eat his flesh and drink his blood :.

    Then what if you see the Son of Man ascend to where he was before! The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. Yet there are some of you who do not believe. Note the bolded quote. It indicates that salvation is based on the choice God makes whether or not to enable someone to come to Jesus. It would seem in the final verse that the disciples who turned back and no longer followed Jesus were the smart ones.

    The story of the last supper is central to Christian doctrine. During this meal, Jesus is alleged to have served bread and wine to his disciples and introduced a mysterious concept that the bread was his body and the wine was his blood. He commanded them to do this in remembrance of him.

    Here is the scripture in Mark:. A similar story is told in the gospels of Matthew and Luke, but, curiously, not in John. Nevertheless, it is clear that this ritual was very important to Jesus. But now comes the problem- there are three diametrically opposed positions held by major groups of Christians on the substance and characteristics of this tradition. Svigel explains:. It contains the body, blood, soul and divinity of Christ.

    And that becomes the spiritual and physical nourishment. As you partake of it, it becomes part of you, transforms you, and makes you more and more righteous. Martin Luther likened this to the idea of a red-hot iron in a fire—united, but not changed. Bock says:. Jesus Christ surrounds the elements. In this understanding, the elements are symbols which remain ontologically unaffected by the ritual.

    https://volunteerparks.org/wp-content/vusebyf/95.php

    Jesus Uninterrupted: The Most Important 4% Of The Bible by G.L. Anderson

    If Jesus introduced this core tradition into his future church and the Holy Spirit, along with Jesus and the Father, were concerned about it being properly characterized for posterity, how could there be such a massive disagreement among Christians? On the other hand, If all of this was simply made up and had no connection to supernatural beings, then this degree of disagreement and confusion is expected. In scripture, it is best described in Romans 5: But the gift is not like the trespass.

    Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people. For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous. The concept of original sin is not presented in the Old Testament and remains heretical to most Jews. Instead, all that is implied is that his sin consigned everyone to a physical death, but not that they were born into a condemned state needing some sort of remedial action to save them.

    So the question is.. One that for centuries avowed the awful idea that dead un-baptized babies went to Hell? The doctrine of original sin shows that Christianity is not a legitimate derivative of Judaism- but rather a human construct disassociated from any legitimate tie to the Jewish faith. The following chart shows the results of a survey of scientists who belong to the distinguished National Academy of Scientists.

    It includes scientists of all stripes, including biologists, astronomers, physicists, mathematicians, etc. This data shows a correlation between the accumulation of knowledge over a century of scientific discoveries, as well as an increase and refinement of knowledge, and the religious beliefs of the scientists leading this wave of discovery.

    On the other hand, if Christianity and other faiths are just myths, then an accumulation of scientific knowledge would be expected to result in exactly what happened. Christianity, and many other religions, are stuck on a book. It leads its followers to assume that what is right and wrong never changes, despite all of the advancements of knowledge and experience over centuries and centuries of human history.

    Nothing written in the past years has been added to it. But the world has changed dramatically over that time. Christianity teaches that men have authority over women, but if ongoing research and historical experience shows that women have talents equivalent to men, is the Christian position still tenable?

    Christianity teaches through its scriptural silence and traditional treatment that animals other than humans have no divinely-inspired rights, but if ongoing science shows that animals have thoughts, feelings, intelligences, and capabilities similar to humans, is the Christian position still tenable? Christianity teaches that premarital sex is prohibited, but if ongoing research indicates that those who engage in premarital sex wait longer to marry and tend to have more successful marriages than those who remain chaste, is the Christian position still tenable?

    It will not change with the times as it should to accommodate changes in society and the increase in knowledge as civilization ages. This is why Christianity and most other religions are failures. A true religion, one based on a real, living god, would surely not look like this.

    Table of contents

    It would change with the times and receive unambiguous messages from its god constantly updating doctrine to coincide with new knowledge and changing conditions. Carl Sagan was a science communicator of astronomy and other natural sciences. He proposed the following analogy that exposes the fallacy of making claims without evidence:.

    And so on. Your inability to invalidate my hypothesis is not at all the same thing as proving it true. Claims that cannot be tested, assertions immune to disproof are veridically worthless, whatever value they may have in inspiring us or in exciting our sense of wonder.

    How Palestinian Activists Manipulate Western Christians

    This is a perfectly logical analog to those who claim the existence of a personal god. Whatever test you propose to elicit evidence of the existence of this god will be met with the same inane rationalizations of how the test cannot or will not work. Further they will claim that the demand for a test is a misguided effort that would have the deleterious effect of destroying the virtue of having faith. It should be evident that the probability that the god of Christianity exists is equivalent to that of the fire-breathing dragon. Christianity unquestionably claims that demons exist and that they inhabit people and can make them act in ways that defies their volition, i.

    It is definitely true that Jesus believed in demons, as a major part of his ministry was to expel them from those who were afflicted. There are over 30 verses in the gospels where Jesus has an encounter with a demon. Most court systems in the United States, Canada, Great Britain, and other such countries are dominated by Christians from the judge to the jury to the lawyers to the defendants. If these people actually believe in Christianity and take notice of what Jesus did during his earthly mission, why is demon possession never considered a valid extenuating circumstance in a criminal trial?

    The answer is obvious. There is no credible evidence for demon possession. Notwithstanding that some exorcists still exist in the Catholic Church and several other denominations, the world, collectively, has come to realize that demons are imaginary beings, and if someone commits a crime, it is the person himself who merits the blame, not an imaginary figure inhabiting his body. This blatant contradiction between the civil court systems that are being run predominantly by Christians and Christian scripture is a powerful statement that even Christians understand that their belief system is flawed- that Jesus Christ, who was allegedly God himself, believed in supernatural beings that they categorically reject out of hand.

    Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness? What harmony is there between Christ and Belial? Or what does a believer have in common with an unbeliever? What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols?

    For we are the temple of the living God. In these verses, Paul is telling the Corinthian Christians that they should not associate with non-believers. There are two possible reasons for this injunction and neither one is good. First, he may be concerned that they may be influenced by ideas of unbelievers and leave the church. Second, he may be concerned that family pressure could cause some to place family relationships above the needs of the church. This is a quintessential technique of cults- to separate new members from their family, friends, and anyone with an alternative belief system.

    The need to separate believers from non-believers indicates that the evidence for your beliefs is shaky and does not hold up well in open examination. The other technique is to demonize the unbelievers, as Paul does by equating them with the Devil Belial. Now the full number of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one said that any of the things that belonged to him was his own, but they had everything in common.

    And with great power the apostles were giving their testimony to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great grace was upon them all. To drive the point home further, in Acts , God slays a married couple, Ananias and Sapphira, because they refused to donate their entire proceeds into the collective reserve. This seems to establish that God endorsed a socialistic standard for the distribution of resources, and that he condemned the stockpiling of personal wealth As Jesus is famously alleged to have alluded to: it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God- Matthew Modern Christianity has not only not followed the economic examples of the early Church, but it has gone the extra step to vilify the practices of socialism, while tying it to the evils of atheism.

    Whenever a movement turns diametrically against its roots and the pronouncements of its formative prophet, it can be certain that there exists a fatal flaw somewhere in the works. The Bible has been copied and translated so many times, it is inevitable that many mistakes would have been made, that is, assuming it to be a project handled by imperfect humans, and not a god-controlled, and thus perfect, endeavor. And that is what happened. There were many mistakes made. At the following, 10 of the most embarrassing typos are documented:.

    This points out two important issues:. Undoubtedly, many of these occurred early in the First and Second Centuries, before the time that we have any manuscripts with which to compare. From this, we can assume that the Bible is of indiscernible accuracy as it relates to the initial writings. There are many miracle stories attached to the Christian faith, including those documented in the Bible, in other Christian writings, in historical tradition, and in anecdotal accounts.

    Generally, these alleged miracles cannot be examined scientifically because of their antiquity and remoteness, and so they can only believed or dismissed on the basis of faith. However, claims of contemporary miracles offer a reasonable chance to be analyzed and judged to be either true or false. This is the case where the realm of science meets the domain of religious faith. And this is where a major problem develops for Christianity and other miracle-based religions. Every recent claim that has made for the occurrence of a miracle that is, by its nature, falsifiable by rigorous examination, has indeed been proven false.

    No scientific analysis has ever documented the legitimacy of any miracle. Such an occurrence would rock the world of science and become a news story that would dominate headlines for weeks. Given that science has been able to repudiate any miracle claims that it has ever examined, it is exceedingly likely that the miracles documented in the Bible and early pre-scientific times would also have been determined false if they had been subject to current-day scientific methods.

    This simply means that the false claims of miracles today implies that the miracle claims of the Bible age are also false. This is not consistent with scripture, of course:. Very truly I tell you, whoever believes in me will do the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father. No image better reveals of the failure of the Christian god to protect one of his most important ambassadors than the vehicle used to transport the Pope during parade reviews.

    It is called the Popemobile and sports bulletproof glass and a bomb-resistant undercarriage. This specialized vehicle was created in response to several assassination attempts on the Pope. What it says loud and clear is that the Christian god cannot be counted on to protect the Pope, regardless of how many prayers are offered. To an objective eye, the image above is all one needs to acknowledge that the Christian concept of an all-seeing, all-powerful, prayer-answering god is a fairly-tale illusion.

    To minimise it or seek to avoid it would be further sin. This attitude led to a form of fatalism still widespread in the East and once common in Western Christendom too. If God wants a person to suffer or die, it is plainly blasphemous for that person to try to avoid their fate. Many thousands of devout Christians thus suffered avoidable death and suffering.

    As Daniel Defoe noted, places where this fatalistic attitude was common suffered significantly higher mortality rates than elsewhere. Well into the twentieth century, devout Christians relied on Psalm 91, which they said clearly confirmed that God would protect them from pestilence and other evils. The devout were held to be immune from epidemics, whatever the evidence might be.

    So it was that many of the devout, and their trusting children, died unnecessarily in epidemics following the advice, or the orders, of their religious leaders. When a belief system instills behavior contrary to science and logic, and results in unnecessary suffering and death, it can be safely assumed that the belief system was not created by a divine being.

    The root essence of Christianity as spelled out in the Bible is one of asceticism, the abrogation of earthly possessions in favor of spiritual treasures. But Christianity has morphed into a completely different animal, one that is driven by money, power, and possessions. The following taken from this website lists the net worth of the 15 wealthiest Christian evangelists:. The question that must be asked is how did this situation develop if God had any influence on the situation? A lot of this money was contributed by earnest believers, thinking that they were donating to a charitable cause, but instead they were just enriching these millionaires.

    Some of the people listed above are probably true believers in Christianity, but others are probably just doing it for the power and wealth it provides. Nevertheless, if God actually set up a religion based on the virtues of being poor and eschewing earthly possessions, would he have allowed it become a gold mine for predator preachers fleecing innocent believers?

    Probably yes. But if Christianity is just a man-made invention, and people tend to be gullible, would this situation be expected? Christianity teaches that God is willing to forgive sins if a person accepts Jesus as his savior. However, it also teaches that this acceptance must occur during the lifetime of that person. Once dead, there is no more forgiveness. How is that moral virtue? The failure of Christianity to compassionately address the fate of conscientious doubters is evidence that it was not developed by an omni-benevolent deity.

    It is a fundamental axiom of Christianity that the letters Paul wrote and that were later incorporated into the New Testament were inspired by God. This means that the messages embedded in these letters were endorsed by God. Every man who has something on his head while praying or prophesying disgraces his head. But every woman who has her head uncovered while praying or prophesying disgraces her head, for she is one and the same as the woman whose head is shaved. For if a woman does not cover her head, let her also have her hair cut off; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, let her cover her head.

    For a man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. However, in the Lord, neither is woman independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. For as the woman originates from the man, so also the man has his birth through the woman; and all things originate from God.

    Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him, but if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her? For her hair is given to her for a covering. Christians cannot reasonably deny that God through Paul commanded women of this time to either cover or shave their heads.

    However, few will deny that this injunction no longer applies. And therein lies a big problem. It raises a host of issues, including why did God change something that must have been important to him at that time? No one who has been emasculated by crushing or cutting may enter the assembly of the Lord. If a person is illegitimate by birth, neither he nor his descendants for ten generations may be admitted to the assembly of the L ORD. No Ammonite or Moabite or any of their descendants may enter the assembly of the Lord , not even in the tenth generation.

    However, the Lord your God would not listen to Balaam but turned the curse into a blessing for you, because the Lord your God loves you. Do not seek a treaty of friendship with them as long as you live. Do not despise an Edomite, for the Edomites are related to you. Do not despise an Egyptian, because you resided as foreigners in their country. The third generation of children born to them may enter the assembly of the Lord. And yes, it was not inspired by a god. Clearly, these verses were written by an unenlightened and extremely superstitious man. This is yet another Biblical example of how people of that time thought that it was perfectly acceptable to punish people for the sins of their ancestors.

    But what is interesting about this particular injunction is that it likely captures every person who has ever lived. Going back 10 generations along either the male or female line, it is very likely that everyone has an ancestor who was born out of wedlock. This is presented as what you deserve if you live a good life, doing your best, though, unavoidably, making a few mistakes along the way. But overall, you treat others kindly, pay your taxes, follow the laws, love and be loved, give to charities, help others, and try with all your might to be a good husband, wife, father, or mother.

    For doing just that, according to Christianity, God will send you to Hell. That is the default judgment. This is exactly what Christians MUST think is fair, or else they have no business following the faith. Sure, they will say, yes, but you rejected the way out of this situation. The primary method used by defenders of the Christian religion is termed presuppositional apologetics. This method of argumentation starts with an assumption that what you are trying to demonstrate is true, and then showing that other possible truths are less likely to be true.

    This is in contrast to the scientific method where you start on neutral ground and objectively evaluate the evidence to see where it seems to point. Creation science uses this method to argue against evolution. That is, it starts with the conclusion that creationism is true, and then finds flaws in evolutionary theories.

    Thus it presents the illusion that creationism is more likely to be true, but this all takes place while ignoring the mountain of evidence showing creationism to be false. What should be understood is that presuppositional apologetics would not be used for any concept that is otherwise adequately supported by objective evidence. It is well established that many of the stories in the Bible, including the creation, the worldwide flood, the virgin birth, walking on water, and the resurrection, are very similar to stories that were written down hundreds of years before they appeared in the Bible.

    The classic example is the Epic of Gilgamesh that is mirrored almost to a tee in the Book of Genesis. There are two possible explanations for this circumstance, as explained at the following website:. Any written historical account gains credibility if the authors actually witnessed the events they describe. Otherwise, the accuracy is greatly diminished and is subject to hearsay distortion.

    In current times, being an eyewitness is not intrinsically important because there exist means of indirect verification, such as videos and verified eyewitness accounts that can be used by a non-eyewitness to achieve a stamp of authenticity similar to an eyewitness. But at the times that the gospels were written, these methods were not available, and most all information was being passed by word of mouth.

    At the following website, a list of 8 reasons describes why scholars do not believe that the gospel authors were eyewitnesses this list was originally compiled by author Bart Ehrman :. The authors of the Gospels do not claim to be eyewitnesses or colleagues of eyewitnesses. Surely, if they were eyewitnesses or colleagues of eyewitnesses, they would have stated this in order to add credibility to their accounts. The Gospels are written in third rather than first person. Surely, an eyewitness would have written in first person. There are many contradictions, hundreds of them.

    What happened to the divine editor? I think a more likely explanation for these contradictions is that stories about Jesus changed during the period of oral transmission and then different Gospel authors wrote different details using these different oral traditions.