The Dink Network

Monarchs and Popes are stupid.

November 7th 2014, 08:45 AM
sob_scorpb.gif
ThePunisher
Peasant He/Him Australia
(Tag Line) How long is this line. 
You agree with me.

Religion sucks.
November 7th 2014, 10:49 AM
duck.gif
Toof
Peasant He/Him
I disagree. 
1
2
3
4
5
November 7th 2014, 11:37 AM
sob_scorpb.gif
ThePunisher
Peasant He/Him Australia
(Tag Line) How long is this line. 
They werent built becasue they had a monarch.

I will admit monarchs did have their place in history when it I was either that or anarchy.

Ill give you a example the last emperor of China is a example of how limited a monarch is Could you imagine a 5 year ruling a enitre country.
November 7th 2014, 12:27 PM
duck.gif
Toof
Peasant He/Him
I disagree. 
I was pointing at some good sides of religion actually. As for monarchs... little is different today, it's all the same, only the names are changed. Don't waste time on such things.
November 7th 2014, 12:30 PM
sob_scorpb.gif
ThePunisher
Peasant He/Him Australia
(Tag Line) How long is this line. 
Monarchs should not exist anymore.

f#ck religion
I have my reasons that I hate it.
Logic and common sense are the ways of the future.
November 7th 2014, 02:40 PM
milder.gif
truthghost
Peasant He/Him United States
i am Ancient 
i admit the best things to come out of religion as a whole were the architecture and the music

because it's godly (literally)
November 7th 2014, 05:57 PM
peasantmp.gif
Skurn
Peasant He/Him Equatorial Guinea duck bloop
can't flim flam the glim glam 
Only one religion is worth following - Atheism. Ahaha, no really. They all suck. Gotta love how people call atheism a religion though. -_-
November 7th 2014, 08:39 PM
milder.gif
truthghost
Peasant He/Him United States
i am Ancient 
i think there's a higher power greater than we could ever even begin to understand

ain't jesus, ain't allah, ain't zeus, ain't any god

we'll never know, and we'll never comprehend it.

"It doesn't think, it doesn't pass judgement, it just is.

And so are we, for a little while" -George Carlin
November 7th 2014, 09:58 PM
knight.gif
KrisKnox
Peasant He/Him United States
The site's resident Therian (Dire Wolf, Dragon) 
People given power will always use it. Even if they don't need to, they will use it, for better or worse, for good or bad.
November 7th 2014, 10:10 PM
anon.gif
CzarButtrfly
Ghost They/Them
 
Monarchs say you're stupid. Also they order their subjects to call you stupid now else their heads will be detached from the rest of themselves. So going by the majority you're stupid, stupid.
November 8th 2014, 10:53 AM
wizardg.gif
schnapper
Peasant He/Him Heard Island And Mcdonald Islands
Let us save our effort and just lie down and die. 
Religious folks invented everything worth having in the world. Except for Stalinism, AK47s and Made in China.

Lol that's one of the stupidest things I've ever said.
November 8th 2014, 11:13 AM
milder.gif
truthghost
Peasant He/Him United States
i am Ancient 
yeah but if we didn't have all the bullshit they gave us on top there's a lot of reason to believe we would'be been a LOT MORE advanced now than we would have
November 8th 2014, 11:18 AM
sob_scorpb.gif
ThePunisher
Peasant He/Him Australia
(Tag Line) How long is this line. 
Religious folks invented everything worth having in the world. Except for Stalinism, AK47s and Made in China.

Uh wasnt Stalin apart of the Orthodox faith?
November 8th 2014, 12:23 PM
custom_skull.gif
Skull
Peasant He/Him Finland bloop
A Disembodied Sod 
i think there's a higher power greater than we could ever even begin to understand

ain't jesus, ain't allah, ain't zeus, ain't any god

we'll never know, and we'll never comprehend it.


Funny how these days so many people seem to believe Jesus, or any of the multiple Gods in mankind's history, is some form of "highest power". I can't think of any religion throughout history, that originally states this. Much like Truthghost wrote there, Jesus himself even specifically said that there is a great power in this realm that even God doesn't comprehend.
November 8th 2014, 01:12 PM
slimeg.gif
metatarasal
Bard He/Him Netherlands
I object 
Logic and common sense are the ways of the future.

If logic and common sense make you a hateful racist I prefer people to be irrational.
November 8th 2014, 04:02 PM
wizardg.gif
schnapper
Peasant He/Him Heard Island And Mcdonald Islands
Let us save our effort and just lie down and die. 
November 8th 2014, 06:32 PM
knight.gif
KrisKnox
Peasant He/Him United States
The site's resident Therian (Dire Wolf, Dragon) 
Jesus himself even specifically said that there is a great power in this realm that even God doesn't comprehend.

Okay, I'm going to need that exact book and verse so I have something to add to the long list of reasons why I don't follow Christianity so I can get my father to stop trying to make me go to church.
November 8th 2014, 06:52 PM
anon.gif
gerbilhat
Ghost They/Them
 
Jesus is just as elusive and fictitious as a God.
November 8th 2014, 07:35 PM
peasantmp.gif
Skurn
Peasant He/Him Equatorial Guinea duck bloop
can't flim flam the glim glam 
Kris, you probably won't find it since there's 3 million billion versions of the Bible. Really, it's sad people have faith in something where the things in their "holy" book are never consistent.
November 8th 2014, 08:49 PM
milder.gif
truthghost
Peasant He/Him United States
i am Ancient 
i DO believe there was a middle-eastern man named Jesus who was a very good person that people told many stories about, like gandhi but better, and over years and years by word of mouth and translations it bascially turned into the largest and most screwed-up game of telephone ever made
November 9th 2014, 12:39 AM
peasantmp.gif
Skurn
Peasant He/Him Equatorial Guinea duck bloop
can't flim flam the glim glam 
That would explain everything, although I still think that the historical figure of "Jesus" could have easily just been a drunk wanderer or delusional wanderer who strode into town and was so hilariously stupid and crazy that the townsfolk loved him and made up impossible stories about him, but then the Romans got really sick of him and thought him a threat, so they executed him along with some other lowlifes.

But hey, at least all "Jesus" stole in the day was the laughter of the townsfolk...and maybe a couple of ales. Aw, duck it. Of course he stole ales. That was his humour fuel.
November 9th 2014, 01:15 AM
spike.gif
There are theories that Jesus and his teachings were Roman propaganda in the first place, manufactured to control a dangerous part of the populace. Suddenly, instead of "KILL ALL THE INFIDELS!" (old testament), it's all "turn the other cheek" (new testament) and "make love, not war". Err, that last one may or may not have actually appeared in the bible.
November 9th 2014, 05:18 AM
peasantmp.gif
Skurn
Peasant He/Him Equatorial Guinea duck bloop
can't flim flam the glim glam 
That sounds quite plausible as well.
November 10th 2014, 07:20 AM
slimeg.gif
metatarasal
Bard He/Him Netherlands
I object 
This conversation:

Jesus himself even specifically said that there is a great power in this realm that even God doesn't comprehend.

Okay, I'm going to need that exact book and verse so I have something to add to the long list of reasons why I don't follow Christianity so I can get my father to stop trying to make me go to church.

Kris, you probably won't find it since there's 3 million billion versions of the Bible. Really, it's sad people have faith in something where the things in their "holy" book are never consistent.

Do you have any idea just how stupid you're sounding right now? You're just trying to be hurtful towards people that have believed in Christianity for the last 2000 years or so. However you're just showing off your own stupidity more than anything.

From archaeological studies and comparisons of different manuscripts written at different times it was shown that the differences that appeared over time where very small. There might be slightly different versions but those differences are very small, try reading up on the Dead Sea scrolls if you're interested. In reality the statement that there are 3 million billion versions is just your way to make sure you don't have to use actual data to present your opinion as fact. Note that Kris' question wasn't even an expression of disbelief, just a genuinely interested question to figure out the truth.

This statement about the different versions is actually kinda clever. It shifts the burden of proof towards people who say that this sentence is not in the bible. Proofing that something is not there is much harder than proofing that something is there, so this is not a fair way to shift the burden of proof. And even when someone reads through the entire bible and finds that this statement isn't there you still get away with it because it is present only in one of those '3 million billion versions', probably the one off which there only exists a single version which just so happens to be on your bookshelf. You can get even more leeway if you say that this sentence might not be present literally, but 'some text of similar content' is. So even when someone does read every version there is you could still get away with it by saying that it is present in some version (of course you won't say which one) but with slightly different wording.

If you want to present any opinion as fact you might be slightly more credible if you can give some specifics. Saying "this text can be found in 1 Peter 1:12" is a lot more credible than saying "You probably can't find it, but it is there, in some version". That last statement is more like saying "I don't care what the evidence says, it's true because I say so!" Right now your notions of Christianity are even less convincing than Predator's review about Civilization Beyond Earth. And that's saying a lot.

Now I'm not saying that this should be a serious discussion about Christianity, I'm just saying how incredibly stupid you look in this thread.
November 10th 2014, 08:01 AM
peasantmp.gif
Skurn
Peasant He/Him Equatorial Guinea duck bloop
can't flim flam the glim glam 
You're serious meta? Have you actually looked up a verse in that thing? I have, and not a single time have I seen a match for whatever verse someone is pointing out.

There's so many ducking versions of that thing, whether they be simplified for kids, have things removed, have words changed, have things translated "better", what say you. It's not a reliable source of anything except knowing just how insane it is to follow something so inconsistent.

And even if it were consistent, it's still poorly written regardless. Every particle of paper contradicts another.

You'd get pretty confused as to how someone can sit down and take something seriously and believe it wholeheartedly if suddenly a work of fiction you enjoy turned out to have several versions, each retconning events from eachother. Now what are you supposed to do? The info in inconsistent. Maybe Jim Bob Weedcracker dies in one version, comes back, and eats a whole tree, but in another version, that same passage is replaced with Jim Bob Weedcracker fighting a tree.

But then someone says "Meta, did you see the ending to Shit Quest 5: The Creed of Apollo? Man, I can't believe the Zebra was behind it all." and you go to check your copy and it's not there. So you do some research and apparently, this is true. So you go searching for this specific version. How does it make sense to do? It doesn't flow consistently and it never will.

A new translation could alter a whole verse, change it slyly and make it more realistic to seem like a prophecy is coming true, could be edited to make it more violent, more "kid-friendly", whatever.

So, go ahead. Try and find that verse. If you find it, cool. That's one version out of countless.
November 10th 2014, 09:11 AM
slimeg.gif
metatarasal
Bard He/Him Netherlands
I object 
You're serious meta? Have you actually looked up a verse in that thing? I have, and not a single time have I seen a match for whatever verse someone is pointing out.

From your response I deduce that you think I'm off by a lot. If what you're saying is true then each version is quite radically different from another. Now instead of sourceless debating we could test things out. Here's a website having many different (English) translations of the bible, probably including all the ones in common use today. If what you say is true it shouldn't pose any difficulty to find any two verses in different translations that say something totally different. I challenge you, find any combination of two translations where the meaning of some part of the text is vastly different. Not just the wording, the meaning of the actual text. If I'm as far off as you claim this should be a piece of cake.

A new translation could alter a whole verse, change it slyly and make it more realistic to seem like a prophecy is coming true, could be edited to make it more violent, more "kid-friendly", whatever.

New translations are not simply adaptations of older translations. If they were then comparing the bible with a really bad case of the game telephone would be a pretty good description. If things are put in new translations that are very different in the source text then that translation is bad. It doesn't mean that the source text is bad, just that the translator did a bad job. If you want to discuss the bible you should probably take a translation that is closest to the source text, not whichever version best fits in with what you want to believe. This cuts both ways too, if the text you are referring to is only present in one translation and not in all of the other ones, then that particular translation is probably off. Unless off course you can proof that that translation is closer to the source material or if you just want to believe in a conspiracy theory for the hell of it.

EDIT: Also you can simply mention which translation you're using, probably more productive then saying 'it all depends on what version you're using'.
November 10th 2014, 11:22 AM
custom_skull.gif
Skull
Peasant He/Him Finland bloop
A Disembodied Sod 
Do you have any idea just how stupid you're sounding right now? You're just trying to be hurtful towards people that have believed in Christianity for the last 2000 years or so.

Another fact: Jesus himself warned about modern Christinity, so why feel bad about being hurtful towards it? I dare you to find any version of the Bible where Jesus doesn't warn his Apostles about future religious figures, beliefs and Christianity itself, which will use his name and teachings wrongly. It's an obvious in-your-face warning about what modern Christianity has become. Of course, not a single Christian actually gets that, and does the exact opposite of what Jesus teaches. xD This can be found in pretty much every version of the Bible, the official one and in many of the lost books. So yeah, I'm not gonna go feel bad anytime soon for debating Christianity, because Christians don't even believe in one of the main teachings of their own "God". Which, btw, Jesus and God weren't the same. That's just more BS added later on, when the churches came along, which is what most Christianity is based off on these days. This is when all the "Jesus couldn't be married", "Women can't be priests", "Holy Trinity", "God is the highest power", "God forgave us our sins" crap came from. Jesus never taught any of these things. These were added much, much, much later. Modern Christianity, its interpretations and the "official" Bible are about as corrupt information as you can get about this stuff. You keep claiming the lost books aren't a reliable source. Have you actually ever read any of them? Many of them actually follow the same path quite closely, even the official Bible. Like it or not, the lost books are as much a reliable source of information as anything in the official Bible. The only reason they AREN'T IN the official Bible, is because the church destroyed and left out a lot of them because they were "heretical" (in other words, revealed too much information about how wrong the church was teaching things). It's insane how these texts aren't in the official Bible and thus aren't being taken as serious, but something as ridiculously hilarious and stupid as The Book of Revelation is.

As for Kris' question, it's in many of the lost books. Probably most famously and specifically in the Gospel of Judas. It varies a little bit in each text, but the basic quote is there. This same quote can be found in texts from some other religions, and similar beliefs were also displayed in Greek Mythology.

Also Kris, if your dad tries to preach you about Christianity and going to church, tell him: "Yeah, let's go worship God. He's the all-powerful ruler of existence. The most awesome, highest power ever. Except when he's wrestling people, losing to them, and resorting to groin-punching to get out of holds".
November 10th 2014, 11:56 AM
slimeg.gif
metatarasal
Bard He/Him Netherlands
I object 
Yeah, if you believe in a book that says one thing and not in another book that says something different you must be insane. Totally logic reasoning this.

Also, you didn't really read what I posted did you? How can anybody 'proof' that any version of the bible doesn't have certain content? Should he basically just dump the entire text here saying 'look! It's not in here!'? Requiring anybody to proof that something does not exist is an unfair reversal of the burden of proof.
November 10th 2014, 01:26 PM
dragon.gif
Quiztis
Peasant He/Him Sweden bloop
Life? What's that? Can I download it?! 
Ooooo, these times again! Religion...
November 10th 2014, 04:01 PM
knightgl.gif
zeddexx
Peasant He/Him New Zealand
I'm pretty sure I'm worth atleast SIX goats... 
I agree about religion. They're just as corrupted as the governments of the world. That being said, I do believe in god. I just don't believe he is "with" religions that support war, sexual immorality, child molestation and basically capitalism. Most churches are just money-making schemes and power plays.

I'd also like to point out that if you claim to believe solely in logic and reason then you shouldn't believe in evolution. It takes more blind-faith to believe in THAT than believing in god for goodness sake! Its just a plain simple fact, logic and reason have no place in the theory over evolution. Idiots claim there IS because it SOUNDS clever, dig as deep as you can into the theory though and you'll realize it makes absolutely no sense. Not only that but I'd much rather believe that we were created by a powerfully being that loves us, rather than believing were just one big accident. No that's the most dumbest thing I've ever heard.
November 10th 2014, 04:04 PM
knightgl.gif
zeddexx
Peasant He/Him New Zealand
I'm pretty sure I'm worth atleast SIX goats... 
I apologize for my grammar and spelling. I still have no idea how to use a smartphone keyboard.

Also don't take my post the wrong way! I respect all your opinions! Only expressing mine ^_^

Keep the hate out aye guys?
November 10th 2014, 04:34 PM
custom_skull.gif
Skull
Peasant He/Him Finland bloop
A Disembodied Sod 
I don't get what you're getting so worked up about, Meta. And I quite honestly even have no idea what you're rambling about. I certainly haven't asked anyone to prove anything. I've just been saying things that are said in the texts themselves. One ancient text is not any less relevant or less proof of anything, than the other. However, what makes the modern official Bible less reliable, is that it's been tampered with a lot throughout the times, and a lot has been left out from it. You can't just look at the Bible as it is now and go "Well, this is all there is to it. Everything true about our religion is held within these covers and everything outside of it is false, even if it adds important missing links". You have to look at all the texts as equal and draw your own conclusions, which really isn't that hard with a little bit of common sense.

If there is an ancient Christian text of Jesus saying "There is a force in this realm that even God doesn't comprehend", I think it is a fairly important piece of history and religion, and far from "stupid". If it's hurtful towards Christians, then it's the Christians own fault for being too stuck in their current views, and not opening their eyes to lessons their own religion teaches. Because as far as I'm concerned, there is nothing hurtful or wrong towards Christians in my actions, if I'm quoting the texts their religion has to offer.
November 10th 2014, 05:04 PM
peasantmp.gif
Skurn
Peasant He/Him Equatorial Guinea duck bloop
can't flim flam the glim glam 
Fun fact - Jews wrote atheistic quotes on the walls of containment camps and the like during the Holocaust. Their teachings are pretty harsh and they make sure to pound that crap into your heads for years. And according to one person I had a debate with, their "holy" book is untouched, which is impossible, but if it were even slightly true, that book is still edited in some ways.

So if more consistent "historical" documents like that are dropped, why can't others look at the Bible more closely and figure things out as well? It's seriously like they grow up in a household where the Bible is forced at them and that's all they know about the religion and refuse all else..

Oh, wait. That's exactly what happens. I'm not condoning the torments the Nazis gave to the Jews that crushed victims' faith, but they endured some serious shit that shook and even destroyed their faith. Why? Because they learned that there is no god to help them, and only their own human comrades around them.

Faith is creepy. It really is. It's scary to put faith in a being who was even described as hateful and genocidal instead of the people around you who can provide actual care.

And if there is this "force that even god does not comprehend", what could it possibly be? As far as I know, every Bible starts out with "There was nothing except god just because, so he decided to have some fun and make a world".

Want my idea of what a god would be? It's really much more plausible than any god described in religions - Hey, honey.
November 11th 2014, 03:03 AM
slimeg.gif
metatarasal
Bard He/Him Netherlands
I object 
Skull, I'm not getting worked up. I just think people are saying stupid things for the hell of it, I pointed that out and apparently people disagree.

I certainly haven't asked anyone to prove anything.

How am I to read this quote then?

I dare you to find any version of the Bible where Jesus doesn't warn his Apostles about future religious figures, beliefs and Christianity itself, which will use his name and teachings wrongly.

Sounds like you want someone (me, specifically) to find a version of the bible that does not contain a certain line of text. So apparently you want me to read the entire bible (which is kind of long I might add) just to find a single line of text you don't even bother to tell where it is. (Other than that it, apparently, is in the bible.) If I were to just say: 'Well it's not in the King James version.' Would you accept that? Or would you say: 'Well Meta, I don't think you've quite looked at it well enough, go try again.' You can't ask someone to show you that something is not there, it's not fair. Just because you only said 'I dare you' and not 'proof to me' doesn't change that.

EDIT: Also I can't see why when you accept certain books from a certain period of time covering a certain topic you'd also need to accept other books from the same period covering the same topics. If you believe what is written in a single book written between 1940 and 2000 covering UFOs, would you have to believe every book written between 1940 and 2000 covering UFOs? That'd probably make for a pretty twisted world view. I can see that you believe that non biblical early Christian writing contains very valuable historical information on the formation of Christianity. But saying Christians should believe a certain body of text just because it is from the same period and has the same topic is just as non sensible as believing every book about UFOs, even if they contradict.

As for Skurn: You're digging that hole deeper and deeper aren't you? First you claim a certain line is in the bible. Then you claim that you won't be able to find it if you were to try. And now you're again claiming that it is there and should be accepted as evidence. Really?
November 11th 2014, 04:43 AM
wizardg.gif
schnapper
Peasant He/Him Heard Island And Mcdonald Islands
Let us save our effort and just lie down and die. 
Skulls 2 texts are most likely these:

"But concerning that day or that hour, no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father" Mark 13:32 which is Jesus' response to the question "When will the Almighty (father) come to recreate a perfect world?"

"Jesus answered: "Watch out that no one deceives you. For many will come in my name, claiming, 'I am the Messiah,' and will deceive many." Matthew 24:4&5 which is suggesting that many liers would come to allegedly create a perfect world.

These are the closest matches to Skull's texts, but obviously they say the opposite of what was quoted.
November 11th 2014, 02:02 PM
peasantmp.gif
Skurn
Peasant He/Him Equatorial Guinea duck bloop
can't flim flam the glim glam 
You're digging that hole deeper and deeper aren't you? First you claim a certain line is in the bible. Then you claim that you won't be able to find it if you were to try. And now you're again claiming that it is there and should be accepted as evidence. Really?

Wat. That's...definitely not what I said.
November 11th 2014, 02:03 PM
slimeg.gif
metatarasal
Bard He/Him Netherlands
I object 
You didn't say this?

And if there is this "force that even god does not comprehend", what could it possibly be? As far as I know, every Bible starts out with "There was nothing except god just because, so he decided to have some fun and make a world".
November 11th 2014, 02:11 PM
peasantmp.gif
Skurn
Peasant He/Him Equatorial Guinea duck bloop
can't flim flam the glim glam 
Yes, because that's like the most iconic moment of the whole thing and, as far as I know, is still the same. Obviously the wording's different from version to version, but it still retains the same content that everyone knows. But I said nothing of it needing to be accepted as evidence.

I'm not sure what you're accusing me of here.
November 11th 2014, 02:48 PM
custom_skull.gif
Skull
Peasant He/Him Finland bloop
A Disembodied Sod 
I'll reply some other day. I've got a fever and I seriously can't bother to write a whole heap of text right now. Because you two (Meta & Scratcher) are so far away from my points that I can't even begin to think how to start steering it in the right direction.

All I'm gonna say is this to Meta: Stop being petty. Of course when I said "I dare you" it wasn't an actual dare for you to do anything. It's a figure of speech in English language, in case you didn't happen to know. It was a backlash at you cause you said that the lost books don't follow each other (which is not true at all), so I said "I dare you to find a version of the Bible that doesn't have this", because it's a part I know to be in every version of the Bible I've read, in nearly all the gospels PLUS in many of the lost texts. I can't remember the exact quote right now, but it's not what Schnapper quoted there. I remember Jesus explained his disciples about a vision and told about future generations of priests and religious figures working in error, using his name and teachings wrongly and how God in the end will put them to shame. It varies a bit in each version.
November 11th 2014, 04:02 PM
slimeg.gif
metatarasal
Bard He/Him Netherlands
I object 
I'm not sure what you're accusing me of here.

Highly exotic paraphrasing that is portrayed as if it is present in actual source text. (That is assuming you're not totally making this up altogether.)

Or in in short: I'm accusing you of doing exactly what you claim translators of the bible are doing as evidenced by this quote:

new translation could alter a whole verse, change it slyly and make it more realistic to seem like a prophecy is coming true, could be edited to make it more violent, more "kid-friendly", whatever.
November 11th 2014, 05:41 PM
peasantmp.gif
Skurn
Peasant He/Him Equatorial Guinea duck bloop
can't flim flam the glim glam 
What, this? There was nothing except god just because, so he decided to have some fun and make a world

I'd consider that more to be comedic abridging than anything.
November 11th 2014, 06:36 PM
custom_skull.gif
Skull
Peasant He/Him Finland bloop
A Disembodied Sod 
Skorn's absolutely correct in his statement though. Not only has the Bible been purposely tampered with more times than the original Star Wars trilogy, it also has a lot of translation mistakes from when it was first translated from Hebrew, such as the word "Gods" being translated into "God". This makes the Bible a rather questionable source of information, at least when it comes to the whole truth about things.

Also, about that UFO example you used earlier, Meta. Of course you don't have to believe in every UFO case ever if you believe in one, but you DO need to take them all into account. Didn't I say to use common sense in my earlier post? I'm pretty sure I did. You need to take every UFO case in history into account, then use common sense to first figure out which ones were hoaxes, then which of the non-hoaxes are actually more likely to be unidentifiable flying objects, and finally what this unidentifiable flying object could've been. Just like in a murder case. You don't have to believe in every piece of supposed evidence, but you can't just debunk it without taking it into account at all. Now, since there is still debate on whether Jesus even existed, we can't really debunk none of it, so therefore one ancient text is as reliable as the other. Of course, common sense applies here too. If I find one ancient text that says "Jesus lived in the year 4000 BC in southern Norway and got eaten by a T-Rex", of course I'm not gonna believe it, since there is no mention anywhere of Jesus living in the year 4000, him travelling to Norway or a T-Rex eating him anywhere else. But I'd obviously have to study things to know that, before I can debunk it with common sense (Do note that this is a not-so-slightly exaggerated example). However, if many of the lost texts say Jesus didn't die on the cross and even the Bible somewhat supports this theory (this isn't an example, btw. This actually is in many of the lost books and the Bible), it's common sense to believe this at least just as much as it is to believe he did die on the cross. It's the same amount of proof against each other, so therefore they both deserve to be believed equally.
November 11th 2014, 07:12 PM
spike.gif
I'll reply some other day. I've got a fever and I seriously can't bother to write a whole heap of text right now. Because you two (Meta & Scratcher) are so far away from my points that I can't even begin to think how to start steering it in the right direction.

Umm... Do I really have to partake?

I agree with Meta, in that this thread needs more actual quotes from the bible/apocrypha, to back up all the hyperbolic personal testimonies being made. "Jesus is a dog. This isn't a joke, it actually says so in the bible." is a pretty unbelievable claim. If I'm going to make that claim, I should be prepared to present evidence that supports it.

However, if many of the lost texts say Jesus didn't die on the cross and even the Bible somewhat supports this theory (this isn't an example, btw. This actually is in many of the lost books and the Bible), it's common sense to believe this at least just as much as it is to believe he did die on the cross. It's the same amount of proof against each other, so therefore they both deserve to be believed equally.

Great, so where is this proof? If so many books say Jesus didn't die on the cross, it should be really easy to look up one on google, and quote the passage here.
November 11th 2014, 08:16 PM
peasantmp.gif
Skurn
Peasant He/Him Equatorial Guinea duck bloop
can't flim flam the glim glam 
Skull, if what you're saying is true about God being a mistranslation of Gods, that radically changes the entire Bible and religion as a whole.

Makes sense too since "God" says "If you worship anyone else, I will blow you up" or some crap. A mere human being worshiped shouldn't be an issue to a divine being...now another god? That's some power struggle between gods right there. But all of them saying that at once...that's strange. Guess they're pretty into being the most popular and they had to shout over eachother.

November 11th 2014, 08:18 PM
custom_skull.gif
Skull
Peasant He/Him Finland bloop
A Disembodied Sod 
Great, so where is this proof? If so many books say Jesus didn't die on the cross, it should be really easy to look up one on google, and quote the passage here.

They are. So why aren't you doing so, if you are so keen to argue with me? I have better things to do than look up tons of exact quotes from all these texts to satisfy your beliefs. But just for your joy, I looked it up on Google, just to see which one would pop up first and one of the first that did is from The Second Treatise of the Great Seth (yeah, probably didn't know RTSoft was around back then. ), which I'd suggest you read, btw. Anyway, the quote from Jesus goes:

"I did not succumb to them as they had planned. But I was not afflicted at all. Those who were there punished me. But I did not die in reality but in appearance, lest I be put to shame by them... I was rejoicing in the height over all the wealth of the archons and the offspring of their error, of their empty glory, and I was laughing at their ignorance."

Nearly all of the lost books say that there was something fishy with Jesus' death on the cross. Some say that another died in Jesus' place (this person varies a LOT) and some state that it was Jesus on the cross but he didn't die. I believe in the latter one, personally, because there's something strange about the whole death thing itself. In the Bible, after Jesus dies, a lot of people (including Pontius Pilatus) are surprised at how unbelieveably fast Jesus had died. Which would go to suggest that he didn't die, but went into some state unconsciousness and faked his death. What also suggests it was Jesus on the cross, is when Jesus appears later and tells his disciples to touch his injuries, which were from the torture he suffered. Throw in the fact that we all know it's not possible to return from the dead, at least by the technology of those times, it all points to the theory that Jesus didn't die on the cross.

The other quote about a higher power God doesn't know. I had to pull it from my computer so I don't really remember where it's from. I probably pulled it from some site ages ago, which I can't find anymore. But I know there are very similar, almost identical quotes in other lost books, including the Gospel of Judas which is all over the Internet, so it shouldn't be hard to find. In the quote Jesus says to Judas and angels: "There exists a boundless realm, whose extent no eye of an angel has seen and in which there exists a great invisible Spirit. Truly I say to you, no eye of an angel has seen, no thought of the heart has ever comprehended, and no angel has called it by any name."

Now the quote itself doesn't say anything about God, but Jesus also explains that God is an angel, and once that angel's time is over, another angel will take his place as God. Therefore, when he says "no eye of an angel has seen", it would obviously mean God (as in none of the Gods) has seen it either.

The stuff is all out there. The more famous ones are really not hard to find at all. And now I really wish this debate would be done with. Only reason I'm even taking a part of it is cause I didn't appreciate myself and my beliefs being called stupid, simply cause I was participating in a thread conversation. Say what you want, I'm done with this talk. Have fun believing in what you want, I'll believe in what I want, and am not afraid to say it out loud. I don't think there is anything hurtful or stupid about that. And that's all I've got to say. Have a good night, guys.
November 11th 2014, 08:23 PM
peasantmp.gif
Skurn
Peasant He/Him Equatorial Guinea duck bloop
can't flim flam the glim glam 
Well, I am now willing to take the Bible even less seriously now in terms of it's reliability. In terms of taking it seriously for the fact that it's really dangerous...well, it looks to be more so now.

I mean, really. I didn't even know of these little factoids/theories/whatever, and if this is something that should be looked at with tons and tons of theories, why bother to trust it?

Seriously.

Seriously.
November 12th 2014, 03:01 AM
knightgl.gif
zeddexx
Peasant He/Him New Zealand
I'm pretty sure I'm worth atleast SIX goats... 
Here is the most accurate bible translation guys. Educate yourselves.
November 12th 2014, 03:23 AM
peasantmp.gif
Skurn
Peasant He/Him Equatorial Guinea duck bloop
can't flim flam the glim glam 
NO. I RECENTLY CAME ACROSS THAT ABOMINATION. I WON'T GO THROUGH THIS AGAIN.
November 12th 2014, 05:26 AM
spike.gif
They are. So why aren't you doing so, if you are so keen to argue with me? I have better things to do than look up tons of exact quotes from all these texts to satisfy your beliefs.

Because you're the one making a claim! You're claiming that "The bible says A", while I'm merely saying "Does it really say A? I don't quite believe you." You have the burden to provide proof.

In the mock example that "Jesus is a dog", are you the one who needs to DISPROVE that claim? Of course not, I'm the one who should cite a source that supports the claim, and if I don't, you can feel free to just laugh at me and call me a fool.

In that particular example, it would actually be possible to disprove the claim - I'm pretty sure the bible explicitly states that Jesus is human. However, what if I made a more ambiguous claim? For example, that "Jesus had a big red birthmark on his butt." There's no way for you to disprove that claim, because no part of the bible (hopefully no apocrypha either) goes into detail about Jesus's butt. You can't deny that I might be right. But there's no reason for you to take that claim seriously, either, you can just say "Where's your proof? I don't believe you." If I then don't provide proof, you again just laugh at me and call me a fool.

"And lo and behold, a big red splotch graceth the rear cheeks of our lord and saviour, and from every day henceforth til the end of days, I give you this sign: the lord's visage shall manifest in the butts of dogs from Judea to Megiddon, as a sign of our covenant."

Err, I kind of lost track of whatever argument I was in the middle of making while 'quoting' that. Umm, let's see:

But just for your joy, I looked it up on Google, just to see which one would pop up first and one of the first that did is from The Second Treatise of the Great Seth (yeah, probably didn't know RTSoft was around back then. ), which I'd suggest you read, btw.

I'm really glad you did, because now the discussion can actually move forward, rather than just being a series of dubious claims being thrown back and forth over and over again.

Anyway, the quote from Jesus goes:

"I did not succumb to them as they had planned. But I was not afflicted at all. Those who were there punished me. But I did not die in reality but in appearance, lest I be put to shame by them... I was rejoicing in the height over all the wealth of the archons and the offspring of their error, of their empty glory, and I was laughing at their ignorance."


I read 'The Second Treatise of the Great Seth', and it was pretty interesting. I'll say this, though: It reads like the kind of thing written by some sort of secret society, purposefully challenging and blasphemous towards the canonical dogma. I really doubt this text was even on the cutting board at all when they were voting on what texts to include in the bible, for example. Instead, it feels like third party fan fiction (like the Extended Universe of Star Wars).

Something with slightly less tenuous connections to the bible, are things that are actually referenced to in the bible: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-canonical_books_referenced_in_the_Bible (Most of which I haven't read myself. Ugh, just getting through the bible was grueling enough.)

Some say that another died in Jesus' place (this person varies a LOT) and some state that it was Jesus on the cross but he didn't die. I believe in the latter one, personally, because there's something strange about the whole death thing itself. In the Bible, after Jesus dies, a lot of people (including Pontius Pilatus) are surprised at how unbelieveably fast Jesus had died. Which would go to suggest that he didn't die, but went into some state unconsciousness and faked his death. What also suggests it was Jesus on the cross, is when Jesus appears later and tells his disciples to touch his injuries, which were from the torture he suffered. Throw in the fact that we all know it's not possible to return from the dead, at least by the technology of those times, it all points to the theory that Jesus didn't die on the cross.

Umm, okay. It sounds to me like you're now treating Jesus, and his crucifixion, as real things that actually existed in history. Neither of which are confirmed at all (I think you said as much earlier), as almost all references to those events come from the religious stories themselves, rather than any credible historical records. Personally, I think the canonical account (that he died and was resurrected) makes for a better story. =)

The other quote about a higher power God doesn't know.

Yeah, I googled The Gospel of Judas, and it does say something to that effect. It seems like this dude, Saklas, corresponds to the god featured in the old testament. Again, though, this text reads more like a second century conspiracy theory, than something on the same level as the books that made it into the bible, but was left out.
November 12th 2014, 06:11 AM
duck.gif
Toof
Peasant He/Him
I disagree. 
I bet punisher is laughing so hard right now.
November 12th 2014, 04:48 PM
dinkdead.gif
"... a lot of translation mistakes from when it was first translated from Hebrew, such as the word "Gods" being translated into "God"."

A lot of translation mistakes maybe, but that isn't one of them.

This has more info about it - it's a Christian site but the article is about the Hebrew translation.

Simple TL;DR version:
It's similar to the word "sheep". No one is going to say that in the sentence "Look at that sheep!" that sheep is plural.
November 13th 2014, 04:36 AM
knight.gif
KrisKnox
Peasant He/Him United States
The site's resident Therian (Dire Wolf, Dragon) 
Note that Kris' question wasn't even an expression of disbelief, just a genuinely interested question to figure out the truth.

<rant>
A slight misinterpretation. I was wanting it primarily to have as extra ammo to use so that my illogical father who would probably disown me if I ever told him I wasn't a Christian would have another thing to rack his brain against, long enough for me to GTFO of here and live somewhere a little more sane.
Regardless of that, the only truth I seek is the truth that I can ascertain through logical reason, as well as personal experience. I follow a personal spiritual path that, at the moment, does not coincide with any deity, ancient or otherwise; but rather is guided by my own instinct and intuition.

Yes, religious figures can be rather ridiculous, especially Christianity, in my opinion. Hell, until recently, there was a religion based around Therianthropy that was short-lived (And that was a small group of people being given misinformation). You can see it in 'official' denominations or 'pagan' paths. But, just because a faith or path has some or more whackos, does not mean that everyone in and of that group are the same.
Hell, we can barely look at another person of another skin color without going into homocidal rage. (Speaking generally, in regards to all humanity, rather than certain groups.)

And yes, there are people who are in positions of power who are bat-ducking-shit insane, and there are those who are more reasonable than most. You see it in all political groups, whether it's the British Parliament (I'm pretty sure I misspelled that.) or the American Government with it's many small parties and those two jackasses, (Well, one jackass and an elephant,) both of which basically create a damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't situation, (And given my wonderful schooling thanks to the American Education System, I can confidently say that the mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell, but heavens help me if I get quizzed on the various forms of government in other countries.)

Anyway, the thing is, none of it really matters. Fighting over religion or politics is just another thing that holds back humanity, (and really exasperates my species dysphoria,) as well as intolerance and blind hatred, and we should all focus on making not only ourselves better, but our fellow humans as well. And hell, add the animals in too, because they're also in it for the long haul.
</rant>