Well, I'm going to leave this here for the first Christian to post in this thread ... he's gonna need it:
![[Image: cherrypicker1_016049d43e-8bcb-4989-8a3d-...9large.jpg]](https://theother87.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/cherrypicker1_016049d43e-8bcb-4989-8a3d-3d3a7164f4b9large.jpg)
Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: May 3, 2024, 4:10 pm
Thread Rating:
|
The Utter Irrelevance of the New Testament
|
 RE: The Utter Irrelevance of the New Testament
May 16, 2015 at 6:54 pm
(This post was last modified: May 16, 2015 at 7:16 pm by Randy Carson.)
(May 16, 2015 at 11:53 am)whateverist Wrote: This is a tribute thread. Perhaps we can discuss not only the historical accuracy of the NT but also why anyone should give a flying fuck if people from 2000 years ago really believed what they wrote. Whateverist- In one sense, it doesn't matter whether they believed it or not. It only matters whether or not it was true. If it wasn't, then your assessment is correct. But if it was, then since much of the content of the NT concerns what happens after we die, many people would find that highly relevant. 
 (May 16, 2015 at 6:54 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: If it wasn't, then your assessment is correct. But if it was, then since much of the content of the NT concerns what happens after we die, many people would find that highly relevant. So what's your take on the trinity? They're one entity, one spirit, right? So what's the purpose of the Jesus sacrifice? It's one of the three personas, who set up original sin. It's another persona, who supposedly sacrificed himself to atone for the sin, his other persona has created. And to top it off, Jesus is god, which means, he's omnipotent, omniscent and eternal. So it's part of the job description that he's immortal, even though he inhabits a mortal shell. And then there's the real world. The one that has been around for about 4,5 billion years in a universe that has been there for about 13 billion years. Menkind has been here for what? 2, maybe 3 million years? Depends on what you want to call human. It's worth noting that we have clocked of about 1 percent of the dinosaur age so far. And some 2000 years ago, he comes to make himself known. In a remote part of the world that wasn't the most developed of it's time. Sounds pretty believable, doesn't it? ![[Image: Bumper+Sticker+-+Asheville+-+Praise+Dog3.JPG]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=1.bp.blogspot.com%2F-d-3rfdI7nG0%2FTerwtFyFXoI%2FAAAAAAAACak%2F7kFSmHeVrng%2Fs320%2FBumper%2BSticker%2B-%2BAsheville%2B-%2BPraise%2BDog3.JPG)
RE: The Utter Irrelevance of the New Testament
May 16, 2015 at 7:25 pm
(This post was last modified: May 16, 2015 at 7:26 pm by Randy Carson.)
(May 16, 2015 at 7:04 pm)abaris Wrote:If I fail to explain one of the most complicated doctrines of Christianity adequately, what? Does the problem lie with the doctrine or with me?(May 16, 2015 at 6:54 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: If it wasn't, then your assessment is correct. But if it was, then since much of the content of the NT concerns what happens after we die, many people would find that highly relevant.  But here's something I put together for someone else earlier this year: Trinity - Basics Understanding the inner life of an infinite, triune God is beyond us, and what we do know is only because of He has chosen to reveal it to us. There is only one God. Within that one God are three persons. They are not three Gods. How is that possible? Well, consider that a dog is a being but not a person. A man is a being and one person. God is a being and three persons. From this you can see that while we usually think one being = one person, in fact, the number of persons "in" a being can vary depending on the nature of that being. We have a human nature. God has a divine nature. The three persons who share the one divine nature are referred to by God Himself as the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. All of them are referred to individually or collectively as "He". The Holy Spirit is not an "It". Unlike human fathers who are older than their sons, God the Father did not exist before God the Son or God the Holy Spirit. The Father is God. The Son is God. The Holy Spirit is God. The Father is not the Son or the Holy Spirit. The Son is not the Father or the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is not the Father or the Son. Two graphics that might help: ![[Image: 250px-Shield-Trinity-Scutum-Fidei-English.svg.png]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=upload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2Fb%2Fb3%2FShield-Trinity-Scutum-Fidei-English.svg%2F250px-Shield-Trinity-Scutum-Fidei-English.svg.png) ![[Image: geb2[1]___03b612c2fa1e4a5183b656b851dcbce0(301x349).gif]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=s3.amazonaws.com%2Fwebjam-upload%2Fgeb2%5B1%5D___03b612c2fa1e4a5183b656b851dcbce0%28301x349%29.gif)
 (May 16, 2015 at 7:25 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:(May 16, 2015 at 7:04 pm)abaris Wrote: So what's your take on the trinity?If I fail to explain one of the most complicated doctrines of Christianity adequately, what? Does the problem lie with the doctrine or with me? http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.co...erent.html Trinity is incoherent read up.
Atheism is a non-prophet organization join today.
Code: <iframe width="100%" height="450" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/255506953&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false&visual=true"></iframe>RE: The Utter Irrelevance of the New Testament
May 16, 2015 at 7:29 pm
(This post was last modified: May 16, 2015 at 7:30 pm by abaris.)
(May 16, 2015 at 7:25 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: If I fail to explain one of the most complicated doctrines of Christianity adequately, what? Does the problem lie with the doctrine or with me? Yes, they all do, not just you. Even theologians have their problems with that mental acrobatics, so I would say the problem lies with the doctrine. And your graph is as contradicting as has to be expected.
"If I make a graph, it is so."
"There remain four irreducible objections to religious faith: that it wholly misrepresents the origins of man and the cosmos, that because of this original error it manages to combine the maximum servility with the maximum of solipsism, that it is both the result and the cause of dangerous sexual repression, and that it is ultimately grounded on wish-thinking." ~Christopher Hitchens, god is not Great
PM me your email address to join the Slack chat! I'll give you a taco(or five) if you join! --->There's an app and everything!<---  RE: The Utter Irrelevance of the New Testament
May 16, 2015 at 7:43 pm
(This post was last modified: May 16, 2015 at 7:44 pm by Brian37.)
(May 16, 2015 at 11:53 am)whateverist Wrote: This is a tribute thread. Perhaps we can discuss not only the historical accuracy of the NT but also why anyone should give a flying fuck if people from 2000 years ago really believed what they wrote. I like the cut of your jib. Unfortunately those in the present and accept it, still have to deal with children who are stuck on Santa whom vote and have weapons.  RE: The Utter Irrelevance of the New Testament
May 16, 2015 at 7:44 pm
(This post was last modified: May 16, 2015 at 7:51 pm by Minimalist.)
Quote:In one sense, it doesn't matter whether they believed it or not. It only matters whether or not it was true. Totally false. Believers believe all sorts of silly shit. You are walking proof of that. (May 16, 2015 at 6:54 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:(May 16, 2015 at 11:53 am)whateverist Wrote: This is a tribute thread. Perhaps we can discuss not only the historical accuracy of the NT but also why anyone should give a flying fuck if people from 2000 years ago really believed what they wrote. Skip the labels. All religions set up in group vs out group. The challenge to our species is to understand this. The more our species does this, the more we can manage. |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
