viperormiata

iTrader: (24)

Fun chart. You would think god could afford a good proof reader.

gearhead_318

iTrader: (1)

Keem 'em comin. I didn't know any of that.

blaen99

iTrader: (6)

Okay. I'll give you the biggest one of them all.

Islam is based on Christianity, and is actually closer to Christianity than Judaism is. Islam's "Allah" is Christianity's "God" verbatim.

In fact, prior to certain dogma of a certain Church, Muslims and Christians were brothers in faith - it was actually (And still is for Muslims who believe in non-distorted doctrine) as bad for a Christian to attack a Muslim as to attack a Christian, and vice versa prior to that xenophobic dogma coming about.

The Christians and Islams who preach violence and hatred against the opposing sects are doing the equivalent of German Baptists preaching hate and violence against Roman Catholics.

viperormiata

iTrader: (24)

1. What year was Jesus born?
a. We don’t know for sure, since the gospels disagree irreconcilably.
b. We don’t know for sure, but the gospels agree it was during the reign of Herod the Great (died around 4 B.C.).
c. We don’t know for sure, but the gospels agree it was when Quirinius was governor of Syria (6 A.D.).
d. We don’t know for sure, but the gospels agree it was the year the moon was in the seventh house and Jupiter aligned with Mars.
e. D’uh! The year zero, of course.

Note: Only two of the gospels even mention Jesus’ birth. Matthew tells us it happened during the reign of Herod the Great. Luke tells us it was when Quirinius was governor of Syria. Which is a problem, since Herod died c. 4 B.C., and Quirinius wasn’t governor until 6 A.D., so one (or both!) of them can’t be right…



2. According to the Gospels, what day was Jesus born?
a. Dec 25th.
b. Dec 24th.
c. No date is given in any gospel.
d. The day of the Winter Solstice.
e. The third night of Hanukkah.

Note: Originally Christians didn’t celebrate birthdays at all; that was what heathens did. Being born into this sinful world was nothing to celebrate; what mattered was leaving it! So they celebrated feast days of saints on the date of their glorious deaths. It wasn’t until the fourth century that Christians began wanting a birthday for their god, too. So they stole the date from…



3. What pagan holiday did later Christians “borrow” to celebrate Jesus’ birthday?
a. The Greek Brumalia festival of Dionysus
b. The Roman feast of Saturnalia
c. Dies Natalis Solis Invicti (“the Birthday of the Unconquered Sun”)
d. All of the above
e. None of the above

Note: All of the above and then some! Throughout the ancient pre-Christian world pagan gods like Mithra, Sol, Elah-Gabal, Frey, Dionysus, Adonis, Horus and many, many, more all had their rebirth on the shortest day of the year, the winter solstice, and their worshippers rejoiced at the Sun’s “rebirth.”

Likewise, there were plenty of pagan demi-gods who were sired by a god and born of a mortal woman. Funny, but Matthew and Luke are the only gospel writers who think that Jesus was born of a virgin. Mark’s Jesus appears to be a completely human being who becomes chosen by god to become savior, and then immediately gets sent to be tested in the wilderness by Satan (that was helpful of him) for 40 days to see if he’s up for the job, and John plainly states that Joseph – not God – was Jesus’ father (1:45) without making any fuss about it.



4. So what day was Jesus really born?
a. Jan 6
b. Feb 2 (Groundhog Day)
c. March 25
d. We can’t be certain.
e. During Sukkoth, the Jewish Feast of Tabernacles

Note: Actually, different Christians have argued for all of these dates and still more. January 6th became the traditional date of Jesus’ baptism and Epiphany (the twelfth day of Christmas and the traditional day the Wise Men visited the baby Jesus). Interestingly enough, it was also the date of the solstice on the older Zoroastrian calendar. This Dec. 25 vs. Jan. 6 dispute was a real contention among believers; the Syrians and Armenians refused to accept December 25, accusing the Romans of sun worship and idolatry. In Eastern Orthodox tradition, January 6 is still the most important day of the Christmas season and Armenians consider it Jesus’ real birthday even today.

And there were plenty of other guesses about Jesus’ birthday. Clement of Alexandria reported that some used the Egyptian calendar, placing it on 25 Pachon (May 20), others on the 24th or 25th of Pharmuthi (19th or 20 April). Other traditions used the Jewish calendar and had Jesus born during Hanukkah (which falls anywhere between late November and late December) or during Sukkoth, the Feast of Tabernacles (which comes anywhere from late September to late October). Clement dismissed them all as superstitions – and maintained Jesus’ real birthday was November 17, 3 BCE.

Today Bible scholars are in no better shape and can only point to the clue that the shepherds were in their fields, concluding it must have been sometime in the fall – or maybe the spring… Still other birthdates for Jesus celebrated by Christian sects have included February 2 (Yes, Groundhog Day!) and March 25, (which is also the Spring Equinox) now celebrated as the Annunciation and considered the date of Jesus’ conception; Needless to say, even though December 25th finally won out over January 6th and the rest of the competition (in the West, anyway), no one had any idea what day Jesus was really supposed to have been born – if he was ever a real person at all in the first place… (see my book Nailed for more details on that…)



5. According to Mark (the oldest gospel) where was Jesus born?
a. He doesn’t say.
b. By the chimney, with care.
c. In his parent’s house in Nazareth.
d. A manger in Bethlehem.
e. A cave in Bethlehem.

Note: Biblical scholars overwhelmingly agree that Mark is the original text that Matthew and Luke borrowed from to create their own gospels (Luke contains 50% of Mark, and Matthew a whopping 90%). But in Mark, nothing is said about Jesus’ birth at all. He arrives on the scene as an adult, at his baptism. It’s only Luke who has Jesus born in a manger in Bethlehem. Christian tradition says the manger was actually in a cave – today the Church of the Nativity is built over it. Interestingly, in pagan mythology (not to be confused with Christianity), many other sun gods were born in a cave, and in fact, the Church Father Jerome noted that the cave of Jesus’ birth had also been a sacred shrine to the pagan god Adonis…



6. According to Luke, who were the Wise Men?
a. The Magi, a group of 2 – 12 Zoroastrian astrologers from Persia.
b. Three kings of orient bearing gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh from afar.
c. There were no Wise Men.
d. Cupid, Donder and Blitzen.
e. Melchior of Persia, Caspar (or Gaspar) of India, and Balthazar of Arabia.

Note: There are no wise men in Luke’s story – they only appear in Matthew’s story. He has the unnamed, unnumbered group of “wise men from the east” follow the miraculous star of Bethlehem to Jerusalem and panic wicked King Herod with their news that a new King of the Jews has been born in Bethlehem. This incites Herod to kill all the baby boys in that region, and causes Joseph and Mary to flee to Egypt with baby Jesus. When an angel later gives them the all clear, they return, not to their home in Bethlehem, but to a new home in Nazareth. (Incidentally, you would think Zoroastrian astrologers from Persia were all three bad things by Christian standards, wouldn’t you?)

viperormiata

iTrader: (24)

7. According to Matthew, who showed up on the night of Jesus’ birth?
a. Shepherds keeping watch over their flocks by night
b. An angel and a multitude of the heavenly host
c. The prophet Simeon and the prophetess Anna
d. Ten lords a-leaping
e. No one.

Note: another trick question – in Matthew’s story, no one witnesses Jesus’ birth at all; he simply says Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king (2:1) with no details. It’s only Luke who tells the story of Mary and Joseph coming to Bethlehem from Nazareth for a Roman census, finding no room at the inn and being forced to give birth in a stable, attended by humble shepherds and a host of angels.



8. What happened after Jesus’ birth?
a. Impossible to say for sure – two of the gospels tell completely contradictory stories, and the other two say nothing.
b. Good tidings were brought for him and his kin; and then figgy pudding, for they would not go until they get some.
c. Scary stuff: An angel warns Joseph to flee their home in Bethlehem for Egypt. Herod kills all the baby boys in the region. After Herod’s death, they return to Judea but are afraid of Herod’s son, so they move to Nazareth in Galilee instead (evidently Matthew forgot that Galilee was ruled by Herod’s other son…).
d. Happy stuff: The shepherds spread the good news to all, baby Jesus is circumcised, and after the obligatory 40 days for ritual purity, brought to the temple in Jerusalem where prophets hail him as the Christ. They return home to Nazareth and go back to Jerusalem every year for Passover until Jesus is twelve.
e. We aren’t told, the gospels immediately cut to his adulthood.

Note: Mark and John’s gospels ignore Jesus’ childhood years. Mathew and Luke’s do tell of his birth – but they tell two completely different stories. The two nativity tales contradict each other at every point. For just one example, Matthew has Joseph finally arrive in Nazareth for the first time only at the very end of the story; while in Luke Mary and Joseph not only both start out in Nazareth, but they go back and forth from Nazareth to Jerusalem for Passover every year during the time when Matthew has them hiding out in Egypt! Remember too that Matthew’s takes place sometime before 4 B.C. and Luke’s takes place sometime after 6 A.D. and gap of at least a decade. By the way, each also presents a competing genealogy of Joseph (Matthew 1:16; Luke 3:23) – even though Joseph isn’t even Jesus’ real dad (and the Bible warns against genealogies besides; see 1 Timothy 1:4 and Titus 3:9)!


9. Which of these traditional Christmas elements were originally pagan?
a. Christmas Trees, Christmas Wreaths, and Yule Logs
b. Caroling, Christmas Ham, Christmas candles
c. The Birth of the Savior
d. Boughs of Holly and Sprigs of Mistletoe
e. All of the above

Note: Are you really surprised? There aren’t too many fir trees in the holy land, but they were revered in pre-Christian northern Europe for thousands of years. Their pagan midwinter fest, Yule, gave us Christmas trees, wreaths and yule logs, and the Yule Boar, now our Christmas ham. There’s still a Yule Goat tradition in Scandinavia, though they are now straw ornaments and decorations, instead of sacrificial meals. The practice of door-to-door Christmas caroling came from wassailing, which has pagan Anglo-Saxon roots. Originally a blessing of the harvest, in some periods it was more like a drunken version of trick-or-treat.

Holly and Mistletoe were sacred plants to many ancient peoples, including the Celtic Druids, the Saxons and Scandinavians. Both were venerated for their ability to stay green during the winter, the symbolic colors of their red and white berries, and other traits such as mistletoe’s golden hue and holly’s prickly leaves. The 3rd century church Father Tertullian, who could be fairly prickly himself, actually condemned the practice of decorating the house for the holidays with boughs or lamps, comparing it to dressing your house up like a heathen temple or a new brothel!

And as we already saw earlier, the winter solstice marked the birth of many savior gods – So many, in fact, that early Christian apologists like Justin Martyr and Firmicus Maternus insisted that the Devil must have foreseen the coming of Christianity in advance and created all the counterfeit Christianities centuries before the real Christianity arrived(!), fuming “The Devil has his Christs!”



10. Where does the word “Yuletide” come from?
a. It’s an abbreviation of the Latin ultimus ides, “last holiday of the year.”
b. From Germanic/Old Norse “Jul-time” or “Jól-time” (the midwinter fest).
c. Named after Julius Caesar, who invented Sanctus Clausius, the Roman Santa Claus.
d. Named in honor of Hywll Tydd, ancient Welsh god of reindeer and socks.
e. Pagan Nordic priests copied the name from the Christian Christmastide.

Note: Only b. is true; the others are completely made up.



11. Who started the War on Christmas?
a. True American Christian Fundamentalists & the Founding Fathers
b. Richard Dawkins
c. Godless atheists, the liberal media, gays and lesbians, activist judges, science teachers, lawyers, the ACLU, democrats and everyone else we hate.
d. The Jews
e. Al Qaida

Note: Believe it or not, the first enemies of Christmas were Christians. When Oliver Cromwell’s forces took power in England in 1653, the new totalitarian Puritan Parliament made Christmas illegal. In the American colonies, from 1659 to 1681, celebrating Christmas was punishable by a fine. But even after the American Revolution, Christmas was still not widely celebrated. In fact, the Founding Fathers didn’t even bother to take the day off to hold the first session of Congress on Christmas Day, 1789. Christmas would not be declared a national holiday until nearly a century later.



12. Our familiar modern American “Santa Claus” is based on all these earlier figures, EXCEPT for:
a. The English Father Christmas, Charles Dickens’ characters and the Victorian cartoons of Thomas Nast.
b. The Dutch Santa, Sinterklaas or Goedheiligman
c. A de-horned, sanitized, anagram of Satan.
d. Mighty Norse thunder god Thor’s father, Odin
e. St. Nikolaos, 4th-century Greek bishop and patron saint of children.

Note: The original St. Nick was St. Nikolaos of Myra, said to be a 4th century Byzantine bishop, now patron saint of children (as well as archers, sailors, and pawnbrokers, oddly enough). As the Nordic Yule festival became subsumed by Christmas, some aspects of Odin and Old Man Winter also made their way into our celebration. But despite the condemnation from some religious groups, Santa has no connection to Satan apart from closeness in spelling.

Interestingly, our Santa Claus is a surprisingly modern construction. Tom Flynn’s The Trouble With Christmas argues that the majority of our Christmas tradition today is largely a product of the Victoria era, and most of the traits we associate with Santa actually come from quite a small handful of 19th-century writers.

Washington Irving (of Headless Horseman fame) actually invented the Dutch Sinterklaas character outright, and inspired Charles Dickens with his Christmas literary inventions, like Santa’s flying sleigh. In the 1880’s, cartoonist Thomas Nast created Santa’s appearance, located his workshop at the North Pole, created his Naughty & Nice list, and many other traits of St. Nick. And of course he continues to evolve and spread into different forms around the world – just like Jesus.



Bonus Question! (re-gifted from the Ultimate Easter Quiz)

13. Who wrote these gospels, anyway?
a. Matthew, Mark, Luke, John – I mean, come on, it says so right there.
b. Actually, none of the gospels even claim to be written by eyewitnesses -all were originally anonymous and written at least a generation later.
c. Well, it’s more like the end of first century for Mark and sometime in the early to mid 2nd century for the others, if you must know.
d. Hold on – Not only that, but Matthew and Luke just reworked Mark gospel, adding their own material and tweaking Mark’s text to better fit what they thought it should say.
e. Get this – if all that weren’t enough, all the Gospels have been edited and added to by later editors, and for the first 200 – 300 years, we have no way to determine how faithfully the originals were preserved.

Note: Technically all of these are true, except for a.

Hope you enjoyed the quiz. I also hope it doesn’t come off as too harsh; I’m just trying to underscore that our beautiful Christmas stories – like all stories about Jesus - are myths, and are part of a very long line of rich, imaginative mythmaking throughout human history. There’s truth in ancient myths just as there are in scientific facts; it’s just that we should never confuse one for the other.

blaen99

iTrader: (6)

As I think about it, the non-distorted doctrine of Islam is actually closer to Christianity's core teachings then the doctrine from several sects of Christianity.

Coincidentally, perhaps ironically, the sects of Christianity that teach hatred of Islam are further away from the core teachings of Christianity than Islam is. Or, to put it more simply, Islam is more Christian than the Christians who preach hate of Islam.

RayinNorCal

iTrader: (6)

The only thing that's going to get you in trouble with religious folks is not posting things that are accurate or truthful, which is precisely what you did here.

You stated:




Hell is a creation of the King James Version of the Bible? That's a new one. I guess this explains why the word Hell is found in every version that preceded the KJV! The fact is, the English word “Hell” carries the same meaning as its Greek counterpart, Hades. Had you first looked up the etymology of the word here you would have known this. Hades, or Hell, is the underworld, the netherworld, the abode of the dead. The Greeks had their concept of the it and the Jews had theirs, and what you read in the Bible is not the Greek version but that of the Jews.

As for Gehenna, you probably didn’t bother to consider that Jesus was using that burning heap down there in Valley of Hinnom as an object lesson regarding where the finally impenitent would spend their eternity, which is in what the Book of Revelation calls the "Lake of Fire," or as I call it, the eternal burning garbage dump of humanity.



No, “virgin” meant then what it still means today—a person who has never had sexual relations. It might help you to know that the unmarried, young woman in Israel was always expected to be a virgin (which is why the idea of virginity is always implied in the Hebrew and Greek words used). Proof of this can be found in the fact that the Law of Moses provided recourse for divorce should a woman's husband find out otherwise on the wedding night. The only exception here would be in cases of a widow marrying, like in the story of Ruth.



The problem with believing the above is that Joseph and Mary were an “espoused” couple, which meant that legally they were already husband and wife before Mary ever found out she was with child. So the idea that the story of Jesus is a story about premarital sex, making a mistake and needing forgiveness is simply asinine. It seems to me that you are just fabricating things out of thin air in the hope that someone ignorant enough (like Gearhead_318) will swallow it without question.



I’ve never heard this explanation before of the Greek word praus but let’s just assume for argument’s sake that it’s true. The lesson here is not that the horse is a war horse or that it doesn’t back down but that the horse is so well-trained it is capable of restraining its natural tendency to react. Instead, it remains calm even when provoked with fire. Similarly, the meek follower of Christ is he whose faith teaches him that he must restrain his passions by controlling his anger, and forsake avenging himself of his enemies even when he too is provoked. It's why Jesus taught his disciples to be "harmless as doves," and it’s also why Wycliffe chose the translation of mylde men more than two hundred years before the King James was ever published.


So the “church” didn’t try to blatantly twist anything. Unfortunatley, I can’t say the same for you.



Please don’t.

blaen99

iTrader: (6)

I'm sorry, this is just so ------- hilarious I'm going to link you somewhere else.

http://ecclesia.org/truth/hell.html

Have fun! I'm sorry, you obviously have a flimsy grasp of this topic.

There is exactly 4 direct mentions of Gehenna by Jesus in the sources I have (Including near-verbatim copies), and all were mentioned explicitly to Hebrews. There are over 550 mentions of Heaven by him, both to Hebrews and non. Don't you think that if Jesus, your lord and savior had a place called "Hell" waiting for people, he'd have mentioned it more than that? I mean, don't you think he'd have talked about it A LOT MORE than that?

Wrong. Upwards of 90% of biblical scholars agree with this, let alone historical scholars. I'm going to use the cheapest of cheap blows here.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/virgin

The original meaning of "Virgin", from 2,000 years ago, still has not been removed from our language, unfortunately for your argument. If you know half as much about Christianity as you appear to be implying, I cannot believe you do not know this tidbit about it - even the vast majority of biblical scholars agree on this point. The "pure" and "has not had sex" as a primary meaning of "Virgin" only came about starting in around the 9th to 11th century - well after the bible had finished it's editing process in ~300AD. (Another tidbit for you there Gearhead: The Bible was extensively edited and rewritten up untill the 4th century.) Finally, and just so you know. According to Judaism, which Christianity was based off of, Jesus was not born of a Virgin-in-the-manner-which-you-speak-of. Rather, he was born from a normal devout Jew under normal circumstances - not even the source text in Hebrew agrees with you on this point.

http://home.comcast.net/~fiddlerzvi/Isaiah7.html as a final "killing blow" to this myth. It's not in contention, even the original Hebrew reflects this.

I'm sorry, I laughed my *** off at this. "Espoused couple" (For those not tuned in, he is referring to Mary and Joseph being betrothed, not "espoused")? You really love to play with words and biblical meanings that you should know better than to do.

Even an "espoused couple" (Read, again, "Betrothed", or "promised" couple in the original text, "espoused" is a specific translation that follows a specific lineage of English biblical translations) is considered to have premarital sex as per most translations of the Bible, and the majority of Biblical sects today. You've done nothing to dispute this but say "Oh noes, this contradicts my belief, so I'm going to deny it and try to throw a bunch of different things in hoping one sticks!"

Again, I laughed my *** off at this. Praus is used to do two things. First off, it is used to describe what you term as "meek". Secondly, it's used to define a well-trained war horse. You are in agreement with this.

However, I have never heard of the description you have tried to place on praus in a single scholarly article, or even "on the interwebs". Ever. This is the first time I've heard that attempt at manipulating the meaning of the word, and frankly, it goes to demonstrate my original point.

Praus in that context means, to the fullest, "Strength under control". It has nothing to do with meek, nor does it have anything to do with "avenging your enemies", nor of "being harmless as doves". For further information, check my next response on this.

All I have to say to this is check out the Church's shennanigans in the middle ages, and then come back to me. There is enormous amounts of documentation on manipulation of scripture and doctrine, as well as wholesale creations of it to support what the Church wanted during this time.

hustler

iTrader: (6)

I bet they got the tithing part right, without contradiction.

hustler

iTrader: (6)

BTW, the worst part about being an atheist is being associated with other atheists.

blaen99

iTrader: (6)

Actually...the tithing part for Christians was created completely out of thin air.

http://bibleanswer.com/tithes.htm

The origin of it stems back to the early middle ages and the Church desiring to become a political and economic powerhouse.

hustler

iTrader: (6)

It's well known that Jesus created tithing so he could have some "walking around money" when he was in Jerusalem. Jesus could not pull a bitch without a scratch grip on the holler.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

omfg, so ------- true.



I should make you admin for comments like that.

hustler

iTrader: (6)

My GF and I discuss this all the time. At some point, you can devote so much energy to not believing in something that it becomes a religion. I think the difference is best demonstrated with statements like "I'm an atheist" vs. "I'm not religious".

FYI: My Atheism church idea is a money making scheme, nothing more. As I see it, a straight line is the shortest distance between two points and those two points are my keyring and a toter-home/tag-stacker key.

blaen99

iTrader: (6)

I vote for an Atheism church that worships cars, drinking beer, and cats.

Make it so, Hustly, for tax exempt status!

Scrappy Jack

iTrader: (2)

Word to your moms. [Edit] It seems I encounter way more vocal and/or vehement athiests than I ever do Christians. [/Edit]

"I'm a Skeptic, with a capital 'S.'"

Or, "I'm a non-theistic agnostic who rejects all modern organized religions, but not the possibility that something beyond the full understanding of humans exists."

Ya know, depending on the audience.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

you are so on point. I pray to hustler.

btw two words: primitive philosophy.

gearhead_318

iTrader: (1)

Watch is it ********, if I was ignorant I'd still be praying to a non existent man in the sky.

Can you provide more links to support your claims?

blaen99

iTrader: (6)

I'm Agnostic that -would- have significant Christian leanings if not for the organized religion part. The actual messages Christianity portrays really are quite good, the problem stems from when the various Churches tried to put in new meanings/translations/etc. to suit their doctrine. As an example, the Crusades during the middle ages came about entirely from Church doctrine that either substantially distorted what the actual text was or created it out of thin air (See: My earlier comments on Islam/Muslims and Christianity).

His claims come from a specific lineage of translations that are translated in such a fashion as to support church doctrine.

I actually know the specific lineage of Bible he ascribes to (KJV variant, it's given away with his comments about Hell, and a variant that was "re"-translated during the 19th century for the "espoused" bit. "Espoused" was used in a way for the reader in that time period for a more appropriate understanding.) I also think I know the exact translation he is using as support for his arguments (Which is one of the most inaccurate translations in English, actually. KJV is a ridiculously poor translation, and the "Re"-translations using KJV as the base only got worse and worse).

The problem stems from, however, the accuracy of the translations. I provided links using the original Greek -and- Hebrew of the Bible, is that not enough for you Gearhead? :(

gearhead_318

iTrader: (1)

I was talken' at RayinNorCal, your fine Blaen.