I hate it when I go and do something and then tell someone about it and they are like “no one else was there so it didn’t happen”.
I’m not saying Jesus is real or anything but like, he coulda just don’t stuff and went back to his boyfriends and been like “hey wild shit I prayed and good was like what up”
Can you cite these passages? Because from my memory, when he’s praying alone, the content of his prayer isn’t recorded and that barely happens at all. There are other things that show that the gospels aren’t historical but please stick to the facts
Disclaimer: I’m an agnostic. Also, the Evangelists are supposed to write as if God himself was in control of their writing, so, effectively, it would be God himself writing those words.
Wait no I changed mine it’s when they put Jesus in a hole, then put a giant wheel of cheese in front of the hole.
The reason Jesus ain’t come back is he needs our help to eat all that cheese and get out of the hole
[now that I think about it I might be able to start a cult around cheese. I told my wife no more cults, but I didn’t promise. Plus, cheese. Maybe she wants to join this one]
Mine is when the Israelites slaughtered entire cities and then they made kids sing about it at Bible Camp.
They still do it to this day
Mine is the part where Moses went up the mountain, tripped balls for a while, write down some laws, came back down and threw a fit because the people had relapsed into their old religion, and smashed the law tablets like a dumbass.
Just the fact that he needed to talk to him is a problem enough. I was raised with the understanding that they were the same person.
Being, not person. Maybe schizophrenics are actually the closest we got to gods image xD
What a worthless world view you have. You just had to write all of that to justify holding onto your ego, when it is so easy to let go.
It’s a meme you dip
Do what? Holy hell, so you not know what memetics are, you dip?
Are you intending to reply to OP? “Write all that”? It’s a sentence
You are missing what I just said. So it goes.
Sorry that the rest of us don’t blindly believe in your bronze age fantasy book, but some of you lot tend to make it our problem from time to time…
Believe? Idiot. I am irreligious. You are sanctimoniously being EXACTLY what you are attacking, MAGA.
objectively wrong in every case. Violence against oppressors does not violate the tolerance paradox.
Are you okay?
Btw… you apparently didn’t watch Monty Python.
Only the Holy Grail. Guess this one’s gone over my head.
Oh, dude, Life of Brian. Must see. Relevant to the discussion and hilarious.
Odd… this is what I might ask my leg.
Loll
Hey now don’t oversimplify it!
We all know about Joseph Smith and the stones in a hat.
Wait, what?
In case you are unaware of the story of the origins of the Mormon faith that Mormons actually believe, go look up the South Park episode titled All About Mormons. It gives a pretty brief overview of everything, including the stones in the hat.
It’s quite a funny episode, tbh.
Smrt smrt smrt smrt smrrrrrt
The origin of the Mormon religion is practically a parody of itself. It’s also a sterling example of why education is so important in developing people’s critical thinking skills so they aren’t all credulous morons.
There’s this great video of the previous head mormon sticking his head in Joe Smith’s hat.
Dum dum dum dum duuum
“This happend to me the other day” and then someone wrote it down.
Religion is such a mindfuck. And life-fuck.
666 likes, 9 dislikes and 63 comments 🤣🤣🤣🤣
😱
9 lmao
Well thats what happens when ur books gets updates faster than ur phone… ;-)
The new testament was written like a hundred years after Jesus died. Its entirely bullshit.
It’s an oral history whose earliest written accounts are dates between 60-150 years after the events in questions.
No more “bullshit” than any number of other 2000 year old transcribed histories.
Contemporary Roman records are less bullshit than Jesus walking on water in the New Testament because the writer cared whether or not it was true.
Contemporary Roman records are less bullshit
Didn’t Pliny the Elder include the Basilisk, the Manticore, and the Phoenix in his Natural History?
Meanwhile, Seneca described the feats of Hercules, the sorcery of Medea, and the plung into the underworld by Oedipus.
How often people do get plunged into the underworld out there? That’s Hercules, Oedipus, Heracles (Hercules’s nonunion Roman equivalent), persephone (rhymes with shone), Orpheus, who else? That’s like all the ancient geeks I know
*ancient nerds
Ah OK I misunderstood and thought you meant anything written down at that time.
There was no such thing as academic tenure in those times and every historian depended on having a patron, usually a wealthy Senator. They probably cared more about keeping their patron happy than whether what they wrote was true or not.
I mean were you there? How do you know the intentions of the people writing things down back then?
Less bullshit, not perfectly credible. Records on taxes and grain production are much more plausible than magic powers.
LOL. Yeah the Romans were known for never being corrupt and they would never ever be skimming some tax revenue! Therefore those tax numbers were 100% accurate all of the time.
And Julius Caesar defeated one zillion Gauls at the Battle of Alesia. He would never exaggerate, because people cared a lot about whether the things they were writing were true.
I think I’ll go on thinking that primary sources are all inherently flawed. The Viking sagas talk about their colony in Vinland along with fighting sea serpents. They’re mostly bullshit, but it’s the only written record of Vinland which is supported by archaeological evidence. Do you discard everything in the sagas because there’s some mythological stuff in them? Do you inherently trust Roman records about taxes because they they’re dry and boring?
Or maybe historians are correct to consider the context of any work written (and that includes religious texts) alongside archaeological evidence? Also consider that for most of history most people couldn’t read or write. There’s always oral history that’s written down centuries later. Many things were never written down, and many things that were written down were destroyed. We have a limited amount of information from historical texts and given how uncommon literacy was in past, it’s usually written by either a wealthy person, someone employed by a wealthy person, or a priest. It’s always going to be an incomplete picture, and it all has a lot of bullshit in it.
Less bullshit, not perfectly credible
Therefore those tax numbers were 100% accurate all of the time.
I’m not sure we’re on the same page here
Yes the other stories are also 100% bullshit
No shortage of contemporary accounts.
But it was collected and disseminated by a bunch of dudes in the 300s
Nicae canonized the subset of Gospels they considered legitimate and excised the Gospels they considered heretical.
But the earliest surviving written gospel is dated to AD 125, with speculation (based on adjacent writings) dating new testament documents back to AD 60.
I thought the Council of Nicaea was about addressing Arianism rather than settling the New Testament canon?
The Council of Nicaea addressed many things, including Christians making themselves eunuchs (as Jesus said to), which was very popular at the time.
I appreciate that link. I also like and recognize that you accept that “early Christians” is a misnomer and they were actually a sect of Judaism. They called themselves Jews as well.
you accept that “early Christians” is a misnomer and they were actually a sect of Judaism
I don’t think this internally contradictory. No more than asserting that “early Mormons” were a sect of Christianity, and therefore not real Mormons somehow.
They were Jewish until they called themselves something different. We know they called themselves Jews until at least the trashing of the temple, so around 70 ad or so. After that, I think the historians say they start to change their names. Not sure if it was always Christians as the name they chose. It’s interesting, I’ll start looking it up.
No, they’re not real mormons now because they’re dead. It’s been like 200 years
I saw a movie several years ago (name below to avoid spoilers) that was “based on a true story” and involved two people stranded in a dangerous situation with no way to communicate with anyone. I watched this whole movie, invested in the characters and the story, and then at the end they died, bodies never recovered. I was so annoyed. I get that biopics take a lot of liberties, but how tf could they say anything but the first ten minutes were in any way “based on a true story”?
Tap for spoiler
I think it was Open Water
Never discovered*
*Within the window of time for the movie
My favorite part of the Bible is Matthew 21:33-45; basically killing landlords is cool and the people who do the work deserve the reward
33 “Listen to another parable: There was a landowner who planted a vineyard. He put a wall around it, dug a winepress in it and built a watchtower. Then he rented the vineyard to some farmers and moved to another place. 34 When the harvest time approached, he sent his servants to the tenants to collect his fruit.
35 “The tenants seized his servants; they beat one, killed another, and stoned a third. 36 Then he sent other servants to them, more than the first time, and the tenants treated them the same way. 37 Last of all, he sent his son to them. ‘They will respect my son,’ he said.
38 “But when the tenants saw the son, they said to each other, ‘This is the heir. Come, let’s kill him and take his inheritance.’ 39 So they took him and threw him out of the vineyard and killed him.
40 “Therefore, when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those tenants?”
41 “He will bring those wretches to a wretched end,” they replied, “and he will rent the vineyard to other tenants, who will give him his share of the crop at harvest time.”
42 Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the Scriptures:
"‘The stone the builders rejected has become the cornerstone; the Lord has done this, and it is marvelous in our eyes’[h]?
43 “Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit. 44 Anyone who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; anyone on whom it falls will be crushed.”
45 When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard Jesus’ parables, they knew he was talking about them. 46 They looked for a way to arrest him, but they were afraid of the crowd because the people held that he was a prophet.
Jesus doing far-left radical anti-government extremist propaganda. If Donald Trump had been Caeser, he’d have done something about it
I feel like you’re taking a very different lesson from that. He’s saying God is the landlord, and the pharisees are the tenants, and when God sent them person after person to get them to behave right, they mistreated them, and then prophesizes his own death by them. Then he says the Kingdom of God will be taken from them (the bad tenants) and given to the rejected (which is a regular theme for Jesus, chilling with the social rejects and talking shit to the religious leaders).
Basically, he’s not applauding the tenants. He’s saying the Landlord (God) is going to kick them out of his vineyard (his kingdom) for being assholes.
Eh, if christofascists can claim Sodom and Gamorrah is about homosexuality and not disrespect for God, then we can take this verse
Dude, my favorite is 2Kings 2:23:24
“Then he went up from there to Bethel; and as he was going up by the way, young lads came out from the city and mocked him and said to him, ‘Go up, you baldhead; go up, you baldhead!’ When he looked behind him and saw them, he cursed them in the name of the LORD. Then two female bears came out of the woods and tore up forty-two lads of their number.”
God kills 42 kids for calling someone bald LOL
That verse is funny as fuck, definitely up there with some of the best. Along with killing all of the pigs being raised for food in a village, because they were all apparently possessed by an army of demons
It’s less violent, but Jesus killing a fig tree because it wasn’t fig season is also really funny.
“Killing?” Even when mocking an opponent, at least be accurate; the demons possessed the pigs who then rushed into water and drowned themselves: https://biblehub.com/mark/5-13.htm
Then the villagers pleaded with Jesus to leave due to having wrecked their economy. Whether Jesus did it because He’s Jewish/anti-pork or that just happened to be what the demons weirdly chose to do (or if it, uh, happened at all, of course), we may never know… But that is how the account goes, regardless.
I analyzed this verse as part of my Bible 101 course in college. The NIV analysis (preferred by biblical scholars) is that Jesus drove the pigs to their death as a continuation of the Mesopotamian tradition of religious warriors
Yeah, but also Jesus, also in Matthew, just 4 chapters later:
“For it will be like a man going on a journey, who called his servants and entrusted to them his property. To one he gave five talents, to another two, to another one, to each according to his ability. Then he went away. He who had received the five talents went at once and traded with them, and he made five talents more. So also he who had the two talents made two talents more. But he who had received the one talent went and dug in the ground and hid his master’s money. Now after a long time the master of those servants came and settled accounts with them. And he who had received the five talents came forward, bringing five talents more, saying, ‘Master, you delivered to me five talents; here, I have made five talents more.’ His master said to him, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant. You have been faithful over a little; I will set you over much. Enter into the joy of your master.’ And he also who had the two talents came forward, saying, ‘Master, you delivered to me two talents; here, I have made two talents more.’ His master said to him, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant. You have been faithful over a little; I will set you over much. Enter into the joy of your master.’ He also who had received the one talent came forward, saying, ‘Master, I knew you to be a hard man, reaping where you did not sow, and gathering where you scattered no seed, so I was afraid, and I went and hid your talent in the ground. Here, you have what is yours.’ But his master answered him, ‘You wicked and slothful servant! You knew that I reap where I have not sown and gather where I scattered no seed? Then you ought to have invested my money with the bankers, and at my coming I should have received what was my own with interest. So take the talent from him and give it to him who has the ten talents. For to everyone who has will more be given, and he will have an abundance. But from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. And cast the worthless servant into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’”
Jesus was kind of a dick.
The stories contradict each other to the point that my top guess is they were written by different people. Either that or one person gathered a bunch of different stories attributed to Jesus and just wrote them all down rather than checking if the messages contained within were consistent or not.
I’d bet that that passage was added during the Roman times, between Constantine adopting it and the fall of the western empire, when Rome was crumbling under the weight of its corruption but the beaurocracy still functioned.
Jesus: socialism
Pharisees: time to kill him
History just repeats itself forever.
