The Contradictions (and complete misunderstandings) of Christianity

Originally posted by CircleOfDust
Since I've been beating up on science quite a bit lately I figured it's time to give our beloved scientists clothed in purple garb a bit of a respite. In fact, some might misinterpret my so-called science bashing as a clever guise for my religious views. Perhaps I'm really a Bible thumper after all.

Well, I used to be. In fact that's what I originally began studying in my undergraduate days, with a desire to become a pastor of my very own church. My my how things change.

Now before you try and save my soul from my backslidden ways, pay very close attention here, because I don't want to have to repeat myself a hundred times. I can guarantee you that there's not one part of the Bible I'm not familiar with. And I probably know more about it than you do. I know more about it than most Christians. So before you go quoting a passage of scripture to me,

I ALREADY KNOW ABOUT IT.

I'll likely already know about any argument you have too. That's the beauty of you Christians, you're so simple minded. Which is not usually a problem, since I enjoy the simple things in the Creator's (the Real Creator that is, someOne you don't know) Universe. But you guys take simplicity of thought to a whole new level. And no, that's not a compliment.

I'm going to just go off the top of my head at first and list the contradictions and misunderstandings of Christianity. This list is no where near exhaustive. And I'll probably revise the list.

If you think of any other contradictions/misunderstandings, please help me with this list, and I'll update.

And please, Christians, for once in your simple little lives, stop believing that everything is an attack from Satan. Could be Satan just doesn't want you to eat from the tree of knowledge. Does God really want to keep you in the Dark? Not my God.


So w/o further ado..The silliness of Christianity:

-The only (greatest) story ever told was the Fall of Saturn. Like Tolkien said, there is no story without the Fall.

-The Bible teaches incest is wrong, but Adam and Eve's family had to have sex with one another.

-The Cross is really our crossing the galactic plane, when the Sun will die.

-The real Sabbath is Saturday, because that is Saturn, the reason why the Jews honor it on Saturday.

-Satan = Saturn

-The Bible teaches in one God, yet the Christians worship 3.

-Jesus = Lord Zeus or Isis or Horus

-God is love but the God of the Old Testament was a war-monger.

-Christians are supposed to let their light shine, but too often they just run their mouths.

-They'll argue the Bible is the Word of God, using the Bible.

-The apostle Paul (Saul) = Sol

-The 12 disciples/apostles = 12 signs of the zodiac

-Scenes in movies depicting sexual imagery is unwholesome but the Song of Solomon is not.

-Faith is enough to save, but faith without works is dead.

-Going to God directly is not sufficient. You must go through Jesus or Mary.

-God gave us free will, but He also created vessels made soley for destruction.

-The Bible tells us to love our enemies, turn the other cheek, and respect authority which makes them perfectly submissive sheep for TPTB.

-The Bible continues the belief that Jews are God's chosen, yet are one of the wickedest people to have existed.

-No where in the Bible does it say that God's love in unconditional.

-Murder is wrong, but we can kill our offspring if necessary for their wickedness.

-Lying is wrong, but yet also exonerated at times depending on its use.

-God is not a man, but Jesus was.

-You must abandon everything for God, but no Christian ever has.

-Images in God's likeness is idolatry, but Christians have no problems with pictures of Jesus.

-That picture of Jesus is usually of Jesus with long hair, even though the Bible says that a man with long hair is an abomination.

-The same common picture of Jesus has his heart outside his chest and his hand showing three fingers, yet the simple Christian has no idea what this means.

-The Bible tells the woman to keep quiet in Church, but look how many women pastors we have.

-Jesus was against organized religion, but that's what Christianity is.

-Jesus only hated hypocrites, not sinners, but Christians hate sinners.



Well, that should do for now I suppose. My brain is starting to hurt from all the stupidity.

Wake up Christians. And understand who the real Creator is, and stop being duped.

But I'm not going to hold my breath. Maybe when you go through the Tribulation (the Rapture is a recent idea) you'll get a clue.

Most likely you'll take the mark of the beast. That's what I think about you hypocrites.

Wow you win the internet....

You are clueless

I am embarrassed for you and your theological understanding.

This thread isnt worth a serious reply.
Way to much nonsense

These stories sound familiar, Strange how they crop up in the gospels. Must have been copies of each other lives me think.

After some time after the death of Caesar, in the sky of Rome a comet appeared and was clearly visible (every day and for seven days, starting one hour before the sunset). This comet appeared for the first time during the ritual games in front of the Temple of Venus Genetrix (Venus was the supposed ancestor of the Julii family) in the Forum of Julius Caesar and everyone in Rome thought it was the soul of Caesar deified called among the other gods. After the appearance of that sign Augustus delivered a public speech giving an explanation of the appearance of the comet. The speech is partially known since we have a partial transcription of it by Pliny the Elder. After the public speech Augustus wanted a few series of coins devoted to the comet star and to the deified Caesar ("Divus Iulius") to be struck and widely distributed. So we can have an idea about the type of representation of the comet star of the deified Julius Caesar.

Augustus loved to be considered the real subject of any kind of Messianic prophecies and accounts. So during the public speech about the appearance of the comet, he specified that he, the new ruler of the world, was born (politically) at the very appearance of his father Julius Caesar as a comet in the sky of Rome and his father was announcing his own (political) birth. So he was the one who had to be born under the comet and whom the appearance of the comet was announcing.

Other messianic prophecies about Augustus are told Suetonius, including the story of the massacre of the innocents conceived in order to kill the young Octavius soon after his own birth. At some time during his princedom, Augustus ordered that all the books of prophecies and Messianic accounts had to be gathered and utterly destroyed. The temple therefore ended up to represent both Julius Caesar as a deified being and Augustus himself as the newborn under the comet and the comet star itself was object of public worship.

Originally posted by tinfoilman
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

Well I don't know I'm not Catholic. I Protestant lol. All I know is they take their tradition seriously.

I'm not Catholic either. However, I'm glad they don't take all their traditions seriously. :-p

Originally posted by azza5540
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

Does it really matter that people get one council confused with the other if the point they are trying to make is " A Council was convened to take the bible apart and put it back together the way they wanted it, not how God had it? and then destroy all books they didn`t want, or anyone else or their religious beliefs if they had those said books? If they can`t read it, they can`t believe it.

Well, you're talking to someone who understands and appreciates classic debate and logic. So precision is paramount. And most of what you said above isn't accurate. That isn't how the canon was formed, that's not the reason behind trying to protect Christians from pseudo-graphical books, or the reason behind calling the Council of Trent.

Originally posted by azza5540
Lets call a spade a spade here, the bible is full of holes and contradictions if you try to read it literally, Just one example.

Gen 1:27 So God created man in his [own] image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Hmm but then:

Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man [of] the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
Gen 2:21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;
Gen 2:22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

What? he created 2 men and 2 women???

No, this is a common, yet erroneous argument. I see it all the time. In Genesis chapter 1 the author is giving a brief overview of the creation week. Chapter 2 deals specifically with day 6 of that creation week itself because subsequent chapters of Genesis talk about the lives of Adam, Eve and their children. Newspapers write in this style all around the world. There will be a headline of sorts in page one giving a brief of the story, then the details and a much expanded narration is given inside on a later page.

reply to post by JiggyPotamus


Well at least someone is attempting at answering some of the points in my OP, thanks for that.

I think you come closest to a valid point at the cross point you made.

The others not so much.

Let me just say that why would God who made so many things all at once...the trillions and trillions of stars and galaxies and all the myriads of planets and animals and diversity...

then just make ONE man and ONE woman?

He's God isn't He? Could've just as easily have made two couples, thereby eliminating the need for incest.

All you guys have to do is think a little bit about this stuff.

reply to post by CircleOfDust


For your information

If Adam and Eve only had two sons, where did all the people come from? It’s a common question for both believers and unbelievers. Where did all the people come from? Where did Cain find his wife? How could he build a city when there should have been only four people?

The Bible does tell us that Adam and Eve had many more sons and daughters. In Genesis 5:4, we find, “After Seth was born, Adam lived 800 years and had other sons and daughters” (NIV). While this does not tell us about the chronology of the events, it tells us that there were more than just four people on earth during the early years of mankind.

Now that we see that there was more than just Cain and Seth, consider man’s extremely long lifespan in the days between Adam and Noah. The average man listed in the Bible during this time lived about 900 years. To help you understand this, Adam was still alive when Noah’s father was born. There were 8 generations living during Adam’s lifetime through Seth’s lineage.

Using this reasoning, the population when Cain took a wife was probably large enough to have several eligible wives for Cain. So Adam and Eve’s children most likely married among each other to start the growth of the population.

Some people bring up the problem of incest when talking about this topic. It was common through Abraham’s days to find sibling marriages. This was how God filled the earth. Considering the purity of the gene pool through the first dozen or so generations, it is not likely that this would cause the difficulties it would cause today.

Source

You aren't doing very well so far are you ?

Cody

reply to post by NOTurTypical

And after all this He created man, a man and a woman created He them, and gave him dominion over all that is upon the earth, and in the seas, and over everything that flies, and over beasts and over cattle, and over everything that moves on the earth, and over the whole earth, and over all this He gave him dominion.

And these four kinds He created on the sixth day. And there were altogether two and twenty kinds.

Jubilees 2: 14 www.pseudepigrapha.com...

That's a lot of kinds of people!

It makes me wonder why certain aspects of the creation story were left out of the Genesis account as compared with the Book of Jubilees. Were the scribes confused by this number of people created? Did the scribes want to hide this part of the story or did they just never think this line of scientific questioning would arise in the future?

reply to post by windword


That's kinda hard to read, the way it's worded, it could just be talking about different kinds of animals. But it doesn't really matter. Genesis also tells us that God created a lot of different kinds of people.

EDIT: Sorry, meant to say, doesn't really matter.

reply to post by tinfoilman


Jubilees is an interesting book. It gives you more detail in the creation story, to the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah. In Jubilees, the battle that Abraham had with the command to kill sacrifice Isaac really came from Satan, in a Job like game scenario with God.

reply to post by windword


Perhaps but the OT view of Satan is so different than ours I wonder if the distinction would even matter. OT Jews considered God and Satan just two sides of the same coin. God had made Satan and God was the author of everything good AND BAD.

Many writings of the time would give credit to God for things Satan had done and others would give credit to Satan for things God had done.

In their view Satan was created by God for a purpose and just part of the plan really. If true, it does make for interesting detail however. But it doesn't have the same effect as saying Satan did it, when you apply our modern day or NT view of the Devil, as pure evil, which the ancient Jews didn't really have. In other words, can we get some sympathy for the Devil here?

After all, look at the story of Job. Kinda makes God out to seem like a jerk with our modern day understanding of Satan. But to the Jews the story made perfect sense. Satan was made for a purpose.

But I believe most added details to Genesis can be implied from just the Genesis text alone. And perhaps the writer of Jubilees for example, got most of their information from just using logic.

I'll give an example. The Jews never read the creation story as a literal single Adam or Eve. Adam in Hebrew means man, or mankind. Maybe God made many different men and women.

And using logic we can deduce that he probably did make different kinds of people. Here's how. After the Tower of Babel God split the people up into different races.

The reason was because they all spoke the same language and all worked together to become like God's themselves. Also, using logic we can deduce this goes against God's original first commandment ever given in the Bible. Be fruitful and multiply and spread out and subdue the earth.

But the people weren't obeying that at Babel. They were crowding together and trying to build a tower to the Heavens. God considered it a problem that there was only one race and one language. This is interesting.

Because if we know the story well we can deduce WHY all the people spoke the same language. Because the story of Babel takes place right AFTER the flood.

Hmm, now this is interesting. The Bible doesn't say anything about this being a problem BEFORE the flood. It's only a problem AFTER the flood because since Noah and his family were the only survivors we know everyone born after that would be the same race and speak the same language as Noah's family did.

But what about BEFORE the flood? Well we don't know, but using logic, perhaps the reason God didn't have an issue with it before the flood is because it wasn't a problem. Perhaps before the flood there were many different races and cultures and God thought it was good.

But how can there be different races before the flood? Well using logic we can deduce that if there were many different races before the flood, it's probably because God actually created MANY different kinds of people and races at creation. But after the flood this was ruined and a problem so God had to fix it again by spreading them out over the earth after the Tower of Babel.

So, see, the same information is sorta there, you just gotta look for it.

And I said to the savior, "What is the forgetfulness?" And he said "It is not the way Moses wrote (and) you heard. For he said in his first book, 'He put him to sleep' (Gn 2:21), but (it was) in his perception. For also he said through the prophet, 'I will make their hearts heavy, that they may not pay attention and may not see' (Is 6:10).

"Then the Epinoia of the light hid herself in him (Adam). And the chief archon wanted to bring her out of his rib. But the Epinoia of the light cannot be grasped. Although darkness pursued her, it did not catch her. And he brought a part of his power out of him. And he made another creature, in the form of a woman, according to the likeness of the Epinoia which had appeared to him. And he brought the part which he had taken from the power of the man into the female creature, and not as Moses said, 'his rib-bone.'

There are so many misconceptions and contradictions but there are also many scriptures that you either haven't read or understood, basing your entire understanding of Christianity or Christ on one book (the Bible) seems like a foolish idea in the first place when there are so many other ancient writings; and unfortunately those who have this belief are often very hard to reason with.

I say it's unfortunate because it would actually be quite beneficial to the community to put all of the pieces together so people could read it ALL and make up their own minds with all of the views present.

This whole incest argument assumes that Adam and Eve were human beings as we are..

It also neglects the stories of the "angels/demons" raping women... as well as Eve.

"And our sister Sophia (is) she who came down in innocence in order to rectify her deficiency. Therefore she was called Life, which is the mother of the living, by the foreknowledge of the sovereignty of heaven.

And through her they have tasted the perfect Knowledge. I appeared in the form of an eagle on the tree of knowledge, which is the Epinoia from the foreknowledge of the pure light, that I might teach them and awaken them out of the depth of sleep.

For they were both in a fallen state, and they recognized their nakedness. The Epinoia appeared to them as a light; she awakened their thinking. "And when Yaltabaoth noticed that they withdrew from him, he cursed his earth.

He found the woman as she was preparing herself for her husband. He was lord over her, though he did not know the mystery which had come to pass through the holy decree. And they were afraid to blame him. And he showed his angels his ignorance which is in him. And he cast them out of paradise and he clothed them in gloomy darkness.

And the chief archon saw the virgin who stood by Adam, and that the luminous Epinoia of life had appeared in her. And Yaltabaoth was full of ignorance. And when the foreknowledge of the All noticed (it), she sent some and they snatched life out of Eve.

"And the chief archon seduced her and he begot in her two sons; the first and the second (are) Eloim and Yave. Eloim has a bear-face and Yave has a cat-face. The one is righteous but the other is unrighteous. (Yave is righteous but Eloim is unrighteous.) Yave he set over the fire and the wind, and Eloim he set over the water and the earth. And these he called with the names Cain and Abel with a view to deceive.

"Now up to the present day, sexual intercourse continued due to the chief archon. And he planted sexual desire in her who belongs to Adam. And he produced through intercourse the copies of the bodies, and he inspired them with his counterfeit spirit.

Originally posted by CircleOfDust
reply to post by lonewolf19792000

 

So are you trying to say that incest is fine in the Bible now?

Within the immediately family no it's not fine, more for medical reasons than anything else, with the increase in risk of genetically recessive traits for diseases becoming dominant. Yes it happened with the progenitors, but those times and the times we live in are very different. Israel was the first known biblical precedence where such practices were outlawed in the immediate family. We know before hand it was not, as Nimrod (Ninush) of Ninevah (Babylon) married his mother Semiramis and had a son they named Tammuz and the ancient Egyptians it was commonplace to marry a sibling to keep royal bloodlines pure which is why many of them suffered from hereditary diseases. In our western society we have grown accustomed to such ideas of marrying cousins or second cousins as being gross or disgusting, but it is not so all over the world.

More evidence of "rape"

"He made a plan with his authorities, which are his powers, and they committed together adultery with Sophia, and bitter fate was begotten through them, which is the last of the changeable bonds. And it is of a sort that is interchangeable. And it is harder and stronger than she with whom the gods united, and the angels and the demons and all the generations until this day.

"And he made a plan with his powers. He sent his angels to the daughters of men, that they might take some of them for themselves and raise offspring for their enjoyment.

And at first they did not succeed. When they had no success, they gathered together again and they made a plan together. They created a counterfeit spirit, who resembles the Spirit who had descended, so as to pollute the souls through it. And the angels changed themselves in their likeness into the likeness of their mates (the daughters of men), filling them with the spirit of darkness, which they had mixed for them, and with evil.

They brought gold and silver and a gift and copper and iron and metal and all kinds of things. And they steered the people who had followed them into great troubles, by leading them astray with many deceptions.

They (the people) became old without having enjoyment. They died, not having found truth and without knowing the God of truth. And thus the whole creation became enslaved forever, from the foundation of the world until now. And they took women and begot children out of the darkness according to the likeness of their spirit. And they closed their hearts, and they hardened themselves through the hardness of the counterfeit spirit until now.

It would seem to me that there is much more to the story of how we got here and what exactly we are...

reply to post by azza5540

or Elohim in its original writings is Plural for El, El is God

Correct, that's actually a pro-Trinitarian argument. The word Elohyim is a plural however when used of the God of the Bible it always appears in the singular context. It's technically a grammatical error in Hebrew. When used of pagan gods (small g), it appears in a plural context. If I were to make a similar grammatical error in English it would be like saying:

"I went to the Ford dealer today and thought myself a brand new red trucks."

reply to post by NOTurTypical


El means saturn.

reply to post by lonewolf19792000


You're response is DISGUSTING. Mainly for medical reasons? Take a hike.

Originally posted by CircleOfDust
reply to post by lonewolf19792000

 

You're response is DISGUSTING. Mainly for medical reasons? Take a hike.

I didn't say I would do it myself. Apparently you missed the whole thing about me speaking about the western civilization . It does go on in other parts of the world. All the other things that go on in the world and you're worried about incest? Personally murder would be at the top of my list, and all things that fall under it but that's me.

Originally posted by CircleOfDust
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

El means saturn.

No. El is the generic title "god" in scripture. When the text is speaking of YHVH it appears as "Elohyim", and it always is used in a singular contextual arrangement in the sentence structure. When the OT refers to pagan gods the title elohyim appears in a plural contextual arrangement in the text.

When Genesis was written astronomers had yet to identify Saturn as a planet. At that time they only thought the 5 visible planets were stars who the figured were moving in the skies. You see, before Capernicus challenged the accepted understanding of the orientation of Earth to the Sun the astronomers had a geocentric understanding of what they saw in the heavens.