The Bible and Christianity

[GoodGirlsGetGutted]

it may clears a few things, if you think about how christianity evolves.

Broken English aside, I agree with everything you said. Not only was the Bible 'constructed' by a Roman emperor (or a Roman tribunal? I'm not entirely sure), the ideas and concepts from the Bible are just ripped from previous religions. They weren't even very original.

- The Bomber

Knight speaks German natively, so there's no need to mock his English.

The Roman Empire hated Christianity during the time of Christ so, obviously, they would NOT have wanted the Bible to survive.

[AbramIsaac]

it may clears a few things, if you think about how christianity evolves.

Broken English aside, I agree with everything you said. Not only was the Bible 'constructed' by a Roman emperor (or a Roman tribunal? I'm not entirely sure), the ideas and concepts from the Bible are just ripped from previous religions. They weren't even very original.

- The Bomber

Knight speaks German natively, so there's no need to mock his English.

The Roman Empire hated Christianity during the time of Christ so, obviously, they would NOT have wanted the Bible to survive.

During the time of Christ, true. I believe that Bomber was referring to the same time that Knight was referring to, and that was the time of the Roman Emperor Constantine, who converted to Christianity. However, this would seem to imply that the religious texts and doctrines were already established to some degree, correct? In that case, I don't see how Constantine would've had a huge effect on the construction of the Bible (as Knight seemed to say), beyond simply legitimizing the religion on a large scale.

However, my Roman history is pretty rusty, so I can't really even argue the details.

[Knight-ofthe-Pen]

it may clears a few things, if you think about how christianity evolves... it's just like the same, but with modern weapons

Broken English aside, I agree with everything you said. Not only was the Bible 'constructed' by a Roman emperor (or a Roman tribunal? I'm not entirely sure), the ideas and concepts from the Bible are just ripped from previous religions. They weren't even very original.

- The Bomber

yeah, I'm sorry for my English but thanks after all

of course it's not original, because Christianity isn't. as i said, it was meant to reform Judaism and of course they used the same base. it's like big brother and little brother fighting over the remote control to watch the exact same thing because of different reasons - it's not making sense but causing a lot of trouble

and the other thing is, people always talk about the same things in a way. if you compare religious tales or tales in general from ancient Greek/Rome with old Agyptian with some Celtic/Germanic gods and might add some Asian stories as well, you will find the same concepts and schemes. just because people always were concerned with such things.
I learned that myself in some courses and were even told about all that stuff I said from some professors of mine.

the most interesting thing is: Christianity once had the believe there are two books from God: the Bible of course as the book of book and "the book of nature" what means the entire world can told you, what God is up to and how you can find your personal religous way to him.

[Knight-ofthe-Pen]

Broken English aside, I agree with everything you said. Not only was the Bible 'constructed' by a Roman emperor (or a Roman tribunal? I'm not entirely sure), the ideas and concepts from the Bible are just ripped from previous religions. They weren't even very original.

- The Bomber

Knight speaks German natively, so there's no need to mock his English.

The Roman Empire hated Christianity during the time of Christ so, obviously, they would NOT have wanted the Bible to survive.

During the time of Christ, true. I believe that Bomber was referring to the same time that Knight was referring to, and that was the time of the Roman Emperor Constantine, who converted to Christianity. However, this would seem to imply that the religious texts and doctrines were already established to some degree, correct? In that case, I don't see how Constantine would've had a huge effect on the construction of the Bible (as Knight seemed to say), beyond simply legitimizing the religion on a large scale.

However, my Roman history is pretty rusty, so I can't really even argue the details.

then you may be read a bit in history books

well as I learnd in school and now at the university
the Roman emperor Constantin I convertet to Christianity and declared it to be the one and only religion of the Roman Empire that was in 4th century AD. So he stopped the persecution of Christians (which was of politcial reasons instead of thinking it's a wrong religion) and even held a council, in which the responsibles should make policy about this right new religion, so that it can do, what Constantine I thought of: he chosed Christianity to reform the Roman Empire and unify his people. He used it for political terms firstly.
And to set the guidance of a religion and say: 'that is what we believe in' it's pretty important to make clear, which holy texts are in the Bible and which not. there are even texts which are important and were very popular in previous centuries, who are not included in the Bible but in the Apocrypha - something like an additional insert.
and there are many many Gospels which are neglected by church, but describe the life of eg Maria Magdelena or Jesus' life between his childhood and his teaching and so many many more. so the huge effect is, the councils made up what we believe now because of political terms in first place and used the stories which were already told to canonize them and said: that's true part of the bible, that's par of the bible too, that's not from now on - so stop telling it any more

(sorry for double posting, was writing till you posted )

[mrjizzbomber]

My German is probably a whole lot worse than your English...

Anyway, once again, I agree. People realized early on the power religion had over people, and they used that power for personal gains.

I don't think most people know the history of their own religion. You know whats funny, growing up Catholic and going through Catholic school. They never TAUGHT the history of their own religion. I learned more history of the Catholic Church through world history in 7th grade than I did in... oh, 6,7,8 years of Catholic school. And yet, that doesn't ring alarm bells to most people.

- The Bomber

[Knight-ofthe-Pen]

well I learned English since I was ten and throughout most of school I was really bad

yeah, I know the same
I was never raised religious or something or even thought about
but now I have to learn some things about Christianity just to clear up what I'm studying. Christianity had a huge effect on European Art and German literature, so it's good to know some things
and to get a proper understanding we are taught a bit how it evolved - and that the most people never really understand/understood what they are believing in, not now and not in previous times. that's part of religion as well, I think

[AbramIsaac]

Ah, I see. That makes since, that some one with the influence that Constantine had would be the one who helped decide definitively what was in the Bible. I knew that he had converted, and spread it, etc; I just didn't know that the text hadn't been set in stone until he decided. Obviously, there are different versions and translations of the bible, but that's really semantics in this context.

Anyway, speaking of the "books" that have been left out of the Bible, has anyone here read any of them? The Book of Enoch (which I think I mentioned earlier) was an interesting one. I believe it's exclusion had something to do with it's wild-ass story of the Nephilum (sp) and it's extensive talk of revelations-esque apocalypse and a messiah (The Elect One). Because of this, it was deemed just a little too crazy, and possibly a book not from the same time period of the other Old Testament books. However, this book was studied by early Christians, and even quoted by Christ himself. It was also found in great abundance in the cave where they found the Dead Sea Scrolls.

It's descriptions of Hell are quite something, though. They were the basis for the descriptions of Hell in Dante's Inferno. I found them to be interesting, anyway. The story of the angels forsaking and procreating with Humans, only to create a monster of sorts, etc. Not nearly as dull as the rest of the Bible.

[Knight-ofthe-Pen]

well I think I definitily will read the Book of Enoch some day, seems to be very interesting and catchy; thanks. my professor just mentioned it shortly in a lecture

but there were always a variety of translation of the Bible and not always correct - as translation is always a two-edged issue. especially by such an important book like the Bible is used to be

[tjb]

and the catholic church definitely has done some evil things over the course of history
purely for power an control. martin luther fixed that. but i think people have a big general idea
of christianity as the catholic faith an thats not it at all

[GoodGirlsGetGutted]

and the catholic church definitely has done some evil things over the course of history
purely for power an control. martin luther fixed that. but i think people have a big general idea
of christianity as the catholic faith an thats not it at all

Catholicism is technically considered "true" Christianity in relation to all other denominations.
The Roman Catholic church and the Holy See are exclusive to each other, and is thus the only true, diplomatic Christian faith.

[tjb]

i dont know they say that but i dont agree at all

[GoodGirlsGetGutted]

i dont know they say that but i dont agree at all

You're in a different denomination?
If so, what's the main reason that you wouldn't convert to Catholicism?
I'm only curious.

[tjb]

i guess you could say im baptist, but i never go to church so
im in a big vague general protestant area
an i dont know, i have something against it
probably just because of some of the things theyve caused an
the whole power hungry thing

[EminemBase]

You're asking for answers for irrational bullshit.

Reason why god would send his children to hell is because all of this babble is from the mind of bronze-age humanity. Jesus Christ did not exist but is one of hundreds of human-incarnations of 'sun gods' created by pagan society.

They worshipped the Sun. They didn't know anything about astronomy or have any real science knowledge so they attributed myths and stories to things. The Sun was quite literally "the light" - They needed it to grow crops and therefore live so they viewed it as "their saviour".

When the sun would disappear into the night they of course did not know why and were scared by the darkness so viewed the darkness as the sun's enemy and "evil". Every night they would postulate that the sun was going down into "the darkness" to fight and in the morning the 'sun / son' would rise to 'save mankind'.

As you can probably see already, the entire threads of all religions is already alarmingly clear from the basic known myths of that age. To think people base their lives on this shit, today, is insane.

Anyway, continuing... That's why they loved the sun and viewed it as "the light" and the source of good. The pure and absolute, unquestionable love of life. And, that's why they viewed the night, the darkness as evil (the devil) and hence = Light vs. Dark = Good vs. Evil = God vs. Devil.

Now, as I was saying - Jesus is one of hundreds of 'sun gods' that's why early imagery of him has sun-rays around his head. They used to create human incarnations of the sun to worship. All of these incarnations they attributed the same astrology-based myths too ie. born of a virgin on the 25th of December yada yada...

If you can be bothered to look into it, you will find an explanation to every myth in the story of Christ. Which is in fact not the story of Christ but the same story that was imagined for dozens of others, totally astrology based and Christianity simply hijacked these themes.

---

To sum up, you criticze the supposed proof of the bible with a critical mind and demand real evidence yet don't see that as valid for the belief in god?

You accept there is a god blindly because you have been indoctrinated from a young age and can't out-think it and as I'm sure, you're typing frantically at your screen right now, hating me, saying no no no you haven't been brainwashed you believe it out of choice and yada yada.

Sure. Well whilst you continue to believe that, don't you find it a bit odd that an overwhelming majority of religious people are the religion of their parents. If you were born in Afghanistan you'd believe in Allah. If you were born in Ancient Greece you'd believe in Thor. They can't all be right and in fact they're not, they're all wrong.

You believe in the god you've been told to believe in. I too went to a Catholic primary and secondary school but luckily saw through it from day one. I can't remember ever believing in the bronze-age babble.

I hope one day you see the real light and embrace logic, rationality and science and discard blind faith, nonsense and superstition. It truly is brain poison. I won't be responding back so don't expect an answer to any requests you have of me, since religious debates are never-ending.

Hope you ditch the crap. Good luck and good bye.

[KillahBee]

The Bible is the biggest contridiction ever put to paper, Christianity ( at least in my country ) is/has always been a corrupt religion, people where basically forced into believing in Christianity in the UK and Ireland, '' believe in God or you'll go to hell'' ridiculous bullshit