I personally put more stock into the idea that Christianity is just a sham, but I'm still not sure. I feel like the only arguements in support of the religion that I've heard are little more than "muh faith". I do want to hear the other side of the issue, so please feel free to discuss
Define "Validity". The historical veracity of Jesus's existence is pretty much accepted as a fact. Every legitimate historical scholar accepts that Jesus was a man who lived in Galilee at the time that the bible says he did, that he was baptized by John the Baptist, that he traveled the land as a preacher and spoke of Salvation and the Coming Kingdom of God, and that he was eventually Crucified under the orders of Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate. This is much is basically considered irrefutable by modern historians.
As for validity of "Jesus Christ is the Messiah" beyond simple faith, it IS worth noting that Jesus was hardly the only figure at the time who was considered to be the Messiah by his followers. It was actually relatively commonplace at the time; Roman Occupied Judea had scores of men claiming to be the Jewish Messiah who would lead God's Chosen People to overthrow their oppressors. The real difference is that most of these Messianic Sects either fizzled out or just extinguished after the head of them died, but Christianity only grew stronger and more popular after Christ's Crucifixion. There are numerous reasons you could give for this, but you can probably guess which ones followers of Christianity go for.
>>1154919
Both of these are correct, though you have to keep in mind that 'The Messiah' was supposed to create a new Jewish state immediately. Not die on a cross as some bullshit sacrifice.
That said, you could argue that the destruction of Rome by Christianity was miraculous and fulfillment of the prophecies saying Rome would be destroyed.
>>1154963
>though you have to keep in mind that 'The Messiah' was supposed to create a new Jewish state immediately. Not die on a cross as some bullshit sacrifice.
That's subject to interpretation though; Christians will point to the idea of the "Kingdom of God" that is attributed to Christ, and the idea that a universal kingdom of the Lord in which all believers are a part of was established through him.
In this context, many passages that were meant to predict the coming of the messiah ("Once he is King, leaders of other nations will look to him for guidance", "He will include and attract people from all cultures and nations", "Knowledge of God will fill the world", "He will be a messenger of peace", "Death will be swallowed up forever", etc.) seem to be fulfilled.
There aren't any. It has been well-known that the thinking of Jerusalem and Athens are irreconcilable. Anyone who tried to make faith 'reasonable' ultimately had to admit that the foundation of their system of thought was still faith. This is most apparent when such systems are confronted with requests for evidence, falsifiability, or when they're confronted with problems like the problem of induction or the is-ought gap
>>1154963
>the destruction of Rome by Christianity
wat
>>1154912
Before the xtian's compound this chat with weird ass xtian beliefs. I just want to be clear, that following a dead rabbi (and it's debatable he even existed) to this day just goes to show it wasn't real.
>>1155049
Christianity weakened the power of the Roman State, prior to the adoption of Christianity the Emperor was seen as a God.
>>1154912
Oh Sam!
>>1155062
That's like saying the princeps model of government weakened the state. I'd argue that it was Diocletian and then Constantine setting up unstable succession in a time when barbarians were knocking on all sides of the empire. And then of course the east west rivalry.
>>1154912
Prophecy is a good argument: take a look at all the prophecies pertaining to the coming of the messiah written in the old testament. See how they match up to the narrative of Jesus's Ministry and Sacrifice.
>>1160152
The Jews certainly do not think they meshed up.
Argument for the Historicity of the Resurrection (by me): http://pastebin.com/9XxNnSU6
>>1160170
How do Jews interpret Daniel 9:26?
>>1160178
Not him, but Jews don't consider Daniel to be a prophet at all, (in large part because of earlier in that same paragraph, where he talks about how Gabriel helped him understsnd things) and consequently pay little attention to his visions.
>>1160214
Daniel is canon for Jews
>>1160225
But not prophetic canon, it's in the "writings" section along with things like Chronicles, Psalms, and Ruth.
>>1160230
So did they cease to see him as a prophet before, or after, the advent Christianity? And what is their exegesis of him today?
>>1160152
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Jesus leave a great deal of prophecies unfullfilled with scriptural promises of a second coming (a purely ad hoc concept that was never even implied in Jewish tradition)? Is it not the case that the Christian Jesus, as claimed, is contradictory to the Messianic description of an purely human military hero? Is it not true that God was said to intentionally grant false massiahs supernatural/miraculous powers to test Jewish faith and that the real Massiah would not exhibit supernatural abilities at all?
>>1160252
The distinction between the Second Coming and the First Coming is clear enough in Hebrew Scripture, if you take the verses about the death of Messiah to be about the Messiah (Daniel 9:26, Isaiah 53:5, for example). Most of what applies to Christ's first coming, is now tied to this, and Jews don't even think of it as about the Messiah. There is a clear distinction between the first and second coming from the start in Christianity: for instance, John the Baptist is a type of the return of Elias, where the real Elias signals the Second Coming (Malachi 4:5); that is why he is referred to like that, even by Christ, but he makes it explicitly clear he is not Elias (John 1:21). In Orthodox Christianity, Elias will return and by martyred to announce the Second Coming. Another example is that the Messiah is called the prince of peace, but Christ forewarns that his first coming is NOT about peace at all (Matthew 10:34)
> Is it not true that God was said to intentionally grant false massiahs supernatural/miraculous powers to test Jewish faith and that the real Massiah would not exhibit supernatural abilities at all?
It says in Exodus to not follow those who perform miracles and try to get people to worship heathen gods, but we're not talking about that.
>>1160252
>Is it not the case that the Christian Jesus, as claimed, is contradictory to the Messianic description of an purely human military hero?
Most descriptions of the Messiah have nothing to do with militaristic endeavors (the armies of the Second Coming), they are about him suffering for us (from a Christian exegesis; from the purely Jewish exegesis, they are still mostly about him bringing the gentiles to worship YHWH and changing the law to be written on hearts instead of tablets, and abolish the ark of the old covenant).
>>1160246
To be honest, hard data on a subject of "when" is hard to come by, given the rather fluid nature of Judaic canon until the composition of the Gemara. (By that point, it's very clear what the conception of a prophet is, which he does not fit, and what books are where in the canon) A lack of any quotes whatsoever from it in the Wisdom of Sirach, (2nd or 3rd century B.C, I forget the exact date) would seem to imply that there were considerable doubts as to whether or not it should be considered a canonical, authoritative text, and thus cast doubts on Daniel's prophetic status.
As for modern understandings, there isn't much of one. Most religious Jews don't study Ketuvim all that much in general, it doesn't have nearly the same kind of authority and interest as other portions of the Tanach. He's primarily regarded as a historical figure, not a teacher for the ages, most important for how he kept things together for the exiled Jewish community in Babylon. He's just not considered that important.
>>1160252
Prophets, actually, not necessarily messiahs. (Although there is some overlap between the two)
>>1160304
A prophet just means a spokesman for God.
I don't really understand how someone whose in Scripture considered to be Holy, could not be important. How could anything which is regarded as Holy, be unimportant?
>>1160252
>Is it not true that God was said to intentionally grant false massiahs supernatural/miraculous powers to test Jewish faith and that the real Massiah would not exhibit supernatural abilities at all?
I hope not, if it turns out that Judaism is the truth and Christianity false I will violently kil myself rather than live as a goy slave to the "master race" Jew.
Christ help us all...
>>1160152
>"look at how this old book that the new book was written as a sequal to predicts what will happen in the old book! It's like they knew it was gonna happen!"
wew lad
Validity of a religion comes down to actually being able to stand in line with scientific and archaeological evidence.
Islam and pigs, Christianity and the virgin birth, literalist creation of any religion and geology, etc.
>>1160412
what are some instances in which the bible does not hold up to scientific/archaeological evidence?
....just, you know, off the top of your head, even keywords that I can look further into. thx anon.
>>1160152
Yes, that is pretty amazing.
Even down to the mistranslations they copied!
http://www.bibleodyssey.org/en/people/related-articles/was-there-really-a-virgin-birth-in-the-bible
>>1155062
There's tonnes of reasons why Rome fell....
Barbarians in the Army
HUGE amounts of refugees from the east
countless invasions
Weakened government, etc.
>>1160343
Christ didn't think very highly of gentiles. If you're white and Christian you're already a cuck to the Jews. Christianity was originally intended for Jews, teaches Israeli supremacy and is only ' for gentiles' in the Earthly sense so far as the religion was a promise or expectation of global Jewish conquest.
What's supremely ironic is the possibility that Christianity (scripturally anyway) was basically fabricated by the Flavians I believe in order to pacify unruly Jews by tricking them into thinking that their promised warrior Messiah was actually a pacifist hippie who was totally going to redeem them later (like, 2000+ years later lol). Thinking about all those gratuitous 'Gentiles are like dogs and Jews are the masters' type platitudes written by Romans to appeal to Jews, only for them to reject it (almost completely) and to have it become the dominant religion of the Gentiles some time later is chuckle worthy.
>>1160361
Here we have a good thread and still you shitpost.
fuck you
>>1160767
Well he makes a valid point.
There's nothing to back up the real fulfillment of these prophecies and the books that mention them were for the most part very clearly written with the prophecies readily quotable.
>>1154919
You can actually doubt the existence of Jesus as fact.
The foundation that the historical Jesus stands on isn't exactly sound.
You can't absolutely refute that he existed but you can't totally claim that he did either.
>>1154912
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8DDIe_2cHM
How evolution is stupid and creationism has scientific evidence.
>>1160985
Good job introducing it in such an unbiased manner.
>>1163616
>unbiased
I can guarantee thaat doesn't mean what you think it means and you expectation of finding it is retarded.
>>1160985
>Kent Hovind
D R O P P E D
>>1154912
Jesus really is God.
Jesus really did rise from the dead.
>>1154963
Rome will be destroyed in the future by fire from heaven. It will be glorious. In one day, all of her blasphemies will be repaid.
>>1155061
So the fact that it exists means it's not real. What color is the sky in your world?
>>1160170
The Jews who became Christians did. Why believe the ones who were wrong?
>>1160252
Murder the Messiah.
Reject the Kingdom.
Blame the murdered Messiah for not ushering in the rejected Kingdom.
Jews.
>>1164489
>I'm afraid of competing theories.
>>1160858
They forced Jesus to be born of a virgin?
In Bethlehem?
During the existence of the Temple?
As an heir to David?
Without incurring the curse of Jeconiah?
In time to be cut off as prophesied by Daniel, 483 years to the day after the proclamation to rebuild the temple was made?
I could do this for hundreds of prophecies, and all you have is what? Disbelief?
>>1164478
>evolution is stupid
bias
>>1164538
God was oppressed!
Christianity truely is the SJW religion.
>>1160174
Friendly reminder that Constantine is functionally retarded and a tripfaggot to boot.
>>1160174
>http://pastebin.com/9XxNnSU6
Yeah no. None of that shit is proves what you claim.
>>1164549
>They forced Jesus to be born of a virgin?
The original OT texts don't have a SINGLE prophecy about Jesus being born of a virgin. The NT writers used the septuagint, which is a Greek translation of the new testament. In the septuagint the word for "young woman" is mistranslated as "virgin."
The entire reasoning for having Jesus be born of a virgin in the gospels is to fulfill a prophecy that literally doesn't exist.
Any modern copy of the bible that's well translated has fixed the error and will include notes about it.
>>1164549
>They forced Jesus to be born of a virgin?
literally yes, see >>1165017
>>1160174
>by me
>looks at trip code: constantine
>dropped
You are the most dishonest liar on this board, denying that Zoroastrianism influenced Judaism.
>>1164979
Reminder that Constantine is a waifufag that chased a tranny off this board and then wore their trip like some kind of buffalo bill suit.
>>1165051
lel
>>1154912
Hey, OP. From my experience on this board, most of the arguments seem to break down to one of the following:
>"evolution is impossible lol"
>"if you're not a Christian you're a degenerate faggot cuck"
>"I bet you wear a funny looking hat and have an unkempt beard"
>"if everyone was an atheist society would collapse because of degeneracy lol"
>"kill yourself loser"
Overall, I think a pretty convincing case had been made that God exists and that Jesus Christ is our lord and savior.
>>1154963
Jew detected
>>1164721
That is literally not what bias means. Bias is entering into a discussion or a quest for knowledge with concrete answers in place such that you seek the answers which conform to your belief to the exclusion of all others in a way which makes you wrong.
Bias is not all opinions you don't agree with. Evolution is stupid. It's junk science. The polonium in the granite could not form in sphere's like it does if the earth was first hot because polonium decays in seconds. IT could only be like it is if it popped into existence on an already cool earth. Just like you don't see last years fireworks still in the sky because the medium isn't dense and static enough but if it was then you'd see it like you see the polonium spheres.
And how dinosaurs are dated by their soil layer and the soil layer is dated by what bones are found there. That is circular reasoning.
And like how carbon-14 decays at a rate of 1/8 every 716 years for a halflife of 5730 years. The sun produces carbon-14 onto the earth. The rate of the sun's production and the rate of carbon-14's decay means that if you took a sun and plopped a new earth when earth is in 30,000 years carbon 14 would reach an equilibrium point where the amount of carbon-14 in the atmosphere/earth is neither increasing or decreasing due to the sun's production. Carbon-14 in the atmosphere and earth is STILL DECAY. Meaning, by the use of science and measurements, the earth is no older than 30,000 years at most. BTFO evolutionists.
"You will be greatly disappointed (by the forthcoming book); it will be grievously too hypothetical. It will very likely be of no other service than collocating some facts; though I myself think I see my way approximately on the origin of the species. But, alas, how frequent, how almost universal it is in an author to persuade himself of the truth of his own dogmas."
Charles Darwin, 1858, in a letter to a colleague regarding the concluding chapters of his Origin of Species.
>>1160586
How about you start from the flood?
>>1154912
It's as simple as asking God and being patient for an answer.
Whenever God reveals himself to man, depending on the individual, it's not always going to be a pleasant experience. Only because you're going to see perfection and how imperfect you are. The guilt and shame can be over bearing. But the love He has in the face of your imperfections, it dwarfs anything you'll ever feel in this life or the next, or ever. A mothers love, fathers love, a wife or husbands love, nothing really compares.
Also Jesus was killed for opposing the "religious law" of his time. These were men who held on tightly to the Torah. But were so corrupted with self righteousness that they couldn't accept even a more merciful law.
I'm not bashing jews btw, I'm just saying you have to be careful with "religion."
This isn't mine, but kinda sheds light on the difference:
RELIGION: I obey-therefore I’m accepted.
THE GOSPEL: I’m accepted-therefore I obey.
For all the "religious" zealots. You just have to remember Job's friends. They tried to convince him that his sufferings were from hidden sins, when Job did nothing wrong. Their response should have been one of comfort for their friend instead of making him feel worse by claiming he must have done something wrong and God is punishing him for it.
>this thread
>>1166861
Why would I feel guilt or shame?
>>1169745
Why wouldn't you? In the presence of God, things can be brought to the forefront that you didn't even know existed in your life or ever thought twice about. It's a painful experience but you're immediately reminded of the love God has for you. The experience is crazy enough to serve as a ever lasting reference point to remember who you really are. Specifically in the contrast to God's will. The friction of who you are, compared to what can only be described as utter perfection, that clash of two differences, it reminds the individual who he really is. Not who the individual is under his own delusion, but who he actually is.
From that experience alone, the forgiveness you can have for others becomes more accessible. Because you'll remember the mistakes you personally made that you never even knew were mistakes, so when you see fault in others, you'll understand the darkness and potential deception they are under.
>>1170887
>what is emotional manipulation
It's almost like you christcucks have fullyrun out of rational arguments or something
>>1170887
***you'll understand the darkness and potential deception they are under, that you too were once under.
So just from that experience alone, being in the presence of God and experiencing just a simple basic judgement, not even final judgement, just a brief peek into who you really are in the face of perfection...that experience alone has potential to change everything from that point forward. To the extent you'll never look at people the same. You'll see their faults as mistakes you too once made. So again, forgiveness and peaceful exchanges will be more accessible. I'm not saying you'll turn into a 'saint' although some are able to, it's just life changing to know there is a witness to everything and this witness is utter perfection. But at the same time completely terrifying that we're in fact left alone to govern ourselves for the most part.
7 to 10 months ago I was into various doctrines. A lot of doctrines and clever ways that claim that man is God, or can be like God.....until you find yourself in the presence of God and you see who man is in comparison. When you see the polarity and the difference, the reference point that distinguishes the difference between man and God.
Never again will I fall for that bullshit.
>>1170928
Don't be dull.
The very purpose of guilt within the emotional spectrum is to create buoyancy. It's a leveling agent within the emotional spectrum.
Sure, you could run around being an asshole without thinking twice about it, but don't act like it doesn't have relatively tangible repercussions.
Also no one said anything about living in guilt. Again, the purpose of guilt is to level out an imbalance.
I mean how do you think humility is even accomplished? Within humility there's a knowing that you're capable of mistakes as well.
>>1170955
The emotional manipulation isn't even the worst part of your pathetic ideology. It's the idea that everyone needs to act in exactly the same fashion and that deviation from it is error by default. Basically, in your worldview, you're taking away all the options someone might have to fill in their own life as they seen fit. By demanding that they subscribe to some abitrary conception of 'perfection' (whatever that may be, you never explain what this perfection even is), you take away the necessary expectation that life has lots of disorder in it and that a one-size-fits-all ideology won't solve a lot of this disorder.
Also, why is perfection supposed to be preferable? You seem to fail to understand that joy without sorrow is completely meaningless. Your aim seems to be the radical and completely unnatural seperation of joy from sorrow, or triumph from suffering, forgetting that you can't have one without the other. Don't you know that the whole meaning of joy lies in its difference with sorrow? Don't you understand that variation is absolutely necessary, and that your idea of heaven and perfection would be absolutely nightmarish? It's related to my first point. People crave variation. We crave options, we crave different points of view and we crave variation in our experiences and emotions. Shame and guilt have their purpose, and it certainly isn't some guilt trip to con someobe into a subpar ideology that you can't escape from anymore because you've accidentally gotten completely rid of your ability to see options in your thinking
>>1170955
Humility is somewhat opposed to guilt actually. To feel guilty you need to judge yourself and that isn't what humble man can do easily. Anyway the best way to archive humility is to know that there exist far forces beyond you and guilt isn't necessary to know about that.
>>1171005
You know, I had to point out that no one said anything about "living in guilt" because I knew exactly how irrational and over dramatic your further responses were going to be and how even more over dramatic your interpretation of what I typed initially was. Also it's why I pointed out the importance of experiencing guilt within the emotional spectrum. The state of feeling guilt is never permanent, more importantly no one said it was, but nonetheless...guilt serves a purpose. Guilt accompanied with empathy, sympathy, it all serves as a correction mechanism within the emotional spectrum. It's why we don't steal candy from kids. Unless...you do, in that case I don't even know why you're replying to me. But the very fact we aren't forced to exercise empathy, sympathy, or the acknowledgement of our guilt is the vary definition of variety of choice.
Also since I'm starting to narrow this down to you being hung up on the word "perfect," who's to say perfection isn't variety? I definitely didn't say that. I mean I personally use creation itself as testament to variety. But are you beginning to see where the over dramatics are unnecessary? The assumptions? I mean no offense, but it makes you come off as kind of cranky.
Now I chose the word perfect to describe God, because I have no idea, nothing else, no other words in my vocabulary to describe Him. Now my definition of perfection is obviously less compressed than yours. For whatever reason you choose to define it as limited. That's all you. Lol don't sit there and claim that as my definition of perfection.
Now within my definition of perfection relative to God is simply this, no suffering. Complete forgiveness and unconditional love. Obviously there's room for more, but generally.....that's MY definition of perfection.
>>1171027
Guilt coincides with humility. Humility is acknowledging personal imperfection. That you in fact could very well have made the same mistake as that other person made, that you are just as susceptible as the next.
Guilt is also acknowledging mistakes. Feeling guilt, when otherwise no guilt was felt creates expansion of awareness. You could easily become aware of aspects of yourself that you never previously knew by way of guilt.
That's why Judgement in God's word, in that amazing book is so significant. Without it, without that perfect judgement, man would have no reference point. Now if you're under the delusion that man can govern himself...history tells you the exact opposite. If you're under the delusion that the world is perfect, or as good as it's ever going to get, or that it's okay that from your personal perspective, that it's okay that it appears only certain types of people in certain situations or certain nations have to suffer. If you think that's okay, or that's acceptable in the face of said perfection, what is God...than dude, I'd seriously urge you to take a second look.
2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.
>>1166861
>Also Jesus was killed for opposing the "religious law" of his time.
Jesus was killed for political subversion and flipping tables over in the temple during passover when romans guards were literally lining the walls of the temple.
You're delusional if you think Pilate took any advice from Jews on who to kill/not kill.
>>1154912
Jesus is a mythological figure. He was made "real" to prevent people claiming new revelations.
John Frum (John from america), the saviour figure of the cargo cults, was not a real person, and it took only a few years to canonise him as a real person wihtin the cult.
"'E look like you. 'E got white face. 'E tall man. 'E live 'long South America."
>>1154963
>on a long enough timeline the mortality rate of every empire drops to zero
@1166508
I'm kind of glad that nobody gives any attention to mr. Creationist over here, it seems like /his/ has putc creationism into the trash where it belongs
I don't buy it at all, but I've been faking it for 4 years, since my wife is pretty staunch about it. It ultimately doesn't really matter.
>>1154912
It just works
>>1154912
Christians are objectively retarded. Just accept it.
