The Official God & Religion Thread

[Lady Fan]

I care. Christianity will decline exponentially. The lower the total number of the Christians - the sooner we will see it die. Not to worry though, I'm confident Christianity will become extinct at some point - just like the thousands of other religions that have come before it.

Total wishful thinking on your part. Oh, that's right, you're an A-T-H-E-I-S-T. Excuse me, my bad.

[Lady Fan]

What most Christians refuse to believe or admit, if they dont already know, is the Old and New Testaments of the Bible are the first "feel good" fictional dramas ever made. Yes, you read that correctly. They are fiction. While the main characters, Jesus, Mary Magdalene, Noah, David etc. may have been real people, the stories are indeed fiction. Whoa! Hold on there Christian believers. Cast not your stones and gather unto me and I shall tell thee of what I speak.

What most Christians do not know is that in 325 A.D., Emperor Constantine convened the first Council of Nicaea. This council's purpose was to establish a uniform Christian Doctrine. Representatives of all Christiandom were present. What the history books do not mention is the Council's real purpose was to prevent an empire-wide war between the Christians and the Pagans. Conflict between the two threatened to tear the Roman Empire apart at the seems and Constantine, a devout pagan until he was on his death bed, did not want to go down in history as the emperor who let the empire slip down the drain. So, he came up with a brilliant plan to save the empire and hence, the Council of Nicaea was the result.

At this council, issues were resolved such as the proper date for Easter, the birth date of Christ, the relationship between God and Jesus as well as the issue of Christ's standing as a deity. However, the most substantial product of this council was the construction of the New Testament of the Bible as we know it today. Specifically, the Council determined what scriptures were to be included in the New Testament and what scriptures were not included.

In doing so, select writings from the various Apostles were selected. All of these writing were carefully vetted so as to preserve a common theme: the Church's claim as the sole conduit between man and God. As a dynamic of this decision, the concept of the superiority of men over women was carefully preserved. Why? Simple. Men were the most common holders of power back in those days and did not want anything to disturb that claim. Therefore, women were denounced as little more than heretics. The reason behind this crucial decision rests in the notion that Mary Magdalene, not Peter, was chosen by Christ to lead the church. There have been a number of writings and other documents that suggest a matrimonial relationship between Christ and Mary Magdalene, but Im not going to get into that here.

In any event, the council devised December 25th as Christ's birth date. In fact, we know this date to be an important date on the Pagan calendar. Prior to this council, Christ was not commonly thought of as a deity. Rather, he was thought of as a prophet. In fact, the Jewish faith still considers Jesus merely a prophet and not the Messiah. The writings of the Apostles were indeed "edited" to support the council's decision to hoist Jesus to the level of Deity. Mary Magdalene, who was of royal blood, was transformed to the station of a common whore who wiped the feet of Jesus with her hair. There is proof that Mary Magdalene was royalty of the House of David. Therefore, it was very unlikely that she was a whore.

One of the main motives behind the council's formation was to preserve the Roman hold on its middle eastern territories. Jesus was of the Royal House of David as well. One of the facts that supports the matrimonial union theory between Jesus and Mary Magdalene is the King of the House of David was overthrown and executed by the Romans when they seized power in the region many centuries before. The Romans could ill afford to have the thrown reconstituted by the union of Jesus and Mary Magdalene. Therefore, as previously stated, Christ was hoisted the level of a deity and Magdalene was denounced as a whore in order to cast doubt on the notion of their marriage. Why would the Romans care about that? In the first instance, the spice trade through the region was extremely lucrative and a mainstay of the Roman revenue in that time. More importantly however, the Middle East was the trade route for the precious Egyptian grain supply to Rome. Without this supply of grain, Rome literally starved. As a result, the Romans were not going to allow anything to threaten Roman control of this region. The possibility of the Jewish Monarch returning to the throne was perceived as a threat and something that had to be handled with a quickness. Most will argue to the death that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were not married. However, there is no way that a Jewish man in those time would ever be single at the age of 33. That was a stoning offense in those days and therefore, it was very, very unlikely that he was single at the time of his death.

With all of this in mind, it comes into glaring relief why the council was formed and the purpose that it served. It preserved the Roman Empire from destruction by literally forging a religion based on fiction and half truths. We are all lucid adults for the most part. In light if the Council's motives, what is more believable? A man healed the sick, raised the dead and walked on water or was he just a man who's simple message was love your neighbor? Was he A man who was literally the Son of God or a man who was truly holy, married a woman, had children and was persecuted for his message and executed for it by a tyrannical regime desperate to maintain power in a region that was unstable at best?

Turning to the Old Testament of the Bible, the same factors apply. What is more believable? A man built a huge boat that, if constructed today, would not withstand the rigors of the open ocean due to its size or was it merely a parable of hope thought up by a race of people who were suffering great hardship and oppression for centuries? How about the story of Moses? Did a man really part the Red Sea, follow a pillar of fire to the Holy land, speak to a burning bush and then, miraculously find two tablets with commandments on them? Or was he just a man who was lucky enough to convince the Egyptians to let his people out of bondage? Moreover, after many years of roaming in the desert, found himself clinging to authority by his fingernails and had to come up with a set of rules to keep these people from scattering to the four winds?

All of the Old Testament stories exalt bravery, hope, righteousness and hope; all the necessary ingredients to preserve the hope of an oppressed people suffering the worst hardships this world has ever known. They are not literal or true stories any more than the stories conjured and edited by the Council of Nicaea that make up the New Testament.

In the end, the only result of this council other than the preservation of the Roman Empire for another couple hundred years, was the demonification of women which lead to their slaughter by the millions over the next several centuries. In fact, the Catholic Church in 1486 went so far as to print a "how to" book that details how to detect heretical females (witches) and how to dispose of them. The book is called Malleus Maleficarum (latin for "The Hammer of Witches").

The most horrific things in human history have been committed in the name of Religion. The Crusades, The Spanish Inquisition, just to name a couple. Deaths totaling in the tens of millions have been racked up by the Christian Church in order to preserve its claim as the only conduit between man and God.

Christianity is a well organized sham built upon a pile of crap. True holiness lives and breathes in righteous thought and actions. Ive seen enough ugliness in this **** hole called the holy land to even consider believing otherwise.

Christians and Muslims alike seem to have the same issue of misinterpreting their religion to fit a preordained political agenda. Nope, not interested, thank you very much. Both religions can have at it without me.

To any believers in the Word who are offended by this post dont reply with angry statements or try to get all roudy with the keyboard or any other nonsense. :-D

A lot of the above is completely wrong. Good try though.

[Lady Fan]

I was talking about the dying individual who long abandoned their deity, but naturally you missed the point there. I like that you are using an argument ad populum there though. It's worthwhile pointing out that the proportion of the population that identify themselves as christians has dropped considerably since they stopped burning people for not being christians.

I've heard of plenty of people calling out for their mothers in their death throws, not many people calling out for a long abandoned deity.

Do you care to explain your "screw-up" here?

"the dying individual who long abandoned their deity"
"not many people calling out for a long abandoned deity"

Your two quotes here have similar meanings eh? Ya right. Can you say B-U-S-T-E-D? You now can man-up and say you were wrong. I can accept that or will you continue on with another excuse to cover-up your mistake?

Thing is that smart people are susceptible to adopting bad ideas and once adopted they are very good at defending those bad ideas because of their smartness.

[The Noose]

I doubt very much an atheist would call out to God if they believed God would send them to hell for all the many decades of sinning and disbelief.

Thats kinda like a rapist calling the police because a whore stole his crack pipe.

LOLZ
Init.

[Lady Fan]

I doubt very much an atheist would call out to God if they believed God would send them to hell for all the many decades of sinning and disbelief.

Your fellow Atheist buddy "TheAuthority" has done it on numerous occasions and I wouldn't doubt that many other disbelievers have done the same.


Why not cry out to the "Flying Spaghetti Monster" instead of God for help? What's odd to me is seeing a "hardened" disbeliever beg for God's assistance only during such times of desperation. What happened to their "logical" way of thinking?

Since most everyone in the World have some concept of "GOD," I believe our minds instinctively know who to search for during crisis. And that is our Creator. (GOD)

Sane man = Logical Disbeliever
Desperate Logical Disbeliever = Beggar of God's help and assistance



"The refusal to believe in anything you can't see yourself is absurd." Richard Dawkins

[squealpiggy]

Do you care to explain your "screw-up" here?

"the dying individual who long abandoned their deity"
"not many people calling out for a long abandoned deity"

Your two quotes here have similar meanings eh? Ya right. Can you say B-U-S-T-E-D? You now can man-up and say you were wrong. I can accept that or will you continue on with another excuse to cover-up your mistake?

I would have thought that in the context you would easily recognise that the "long abandoned" deity was "long abandoned" by those people you rather disturbingly fantasized about being near death and regressing to a state of desperate belief. A particularly painful death can be observed to have an infantilising effect on the sufferer as evidenced by the fact that so many people call out for their mothers. So maybe you will be right, an agonising death may well cause an atheist to abandon reason and cry out for help from someone whose existence is doubtful. Maybe if it's particularly harsh they might even call out for help from the Easter bunny.

[Lady Fan]

I would have thought that in the context you would easily recognise that the "long abandoned" deity was "long abandoned" by those people you rather disturbingly fantasized about being near death and regressing to a state of desperate belief. A particularly painful death can be observed to have an infantilising effect on the sufferer as evidenced by the fact that so many people call out for their mothers. So maybe you will be right, an agonising death may well cause an atheist to abandon reason and cry out for help from someone whose existence is doubtful. Maybe if it's particularly harsh they might even call out for help from the Easter bunny.

Well of course, more self-protecting babble to get yourself out of a jam. Why would any "Intellect Nerd" admit he's wrong? That would be way too illogical right?

Thing is that smart people are susceptible to adopting bad ideas and once adopted they are very good at defending those bad ideas because of their smartness.

[Grand Champ]

I would have thought that in the context you would easily recognise that the "long abandoned" deity was "long abandoned" by those people you rather disturbingly fantasized about being near death and regressing to a state of desperate belief. A particularly painful death can be observed to have an infantilising effect on the sufferer as evidenced by the fact that so many people call out for their mothers. So maybe you will be right, an agonising death may well cause an atheist to abandon reason and cry out for help from someone whose existence is doubtful. Maybe if it's particularly harsh they might even call out for help from the Easter bunny.

I can't believe you keep feeding her/him/that with attention. You really enjoy this kind of talk no matter how stupid, biased and all around tiresome the your debater is eh..

[LeG00N]

Atheist scum...... enjoy burning in eternal hell


If GOD doesn't real how does the bible exist ?
If GOD doesn't real explain Jesus


/thread

[Lady Fan]

Atheist scum...... enjoy burning in eternal hell

You're not very nice to those you associate with.