I’m not religious but I’m a massive Trump and Q follower. I see lots Christians on the board, any other atheists around here?
How do you view the religious factor in the Q movement?
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (252)
sorted by:
Whether you think it's sharp or not is irrelevant... Your bible isn't a historical document. It's a religious text that tries to get passed down as a history book. Sure, it's been around a long time (as have many other ancient texts) but its claims about extraordinary events of the past are unable to be objectively verified.
Explain that to all the Archeologists who use it to guide their historical digs.
Me thinks you are saying/proving too much here. Because by that logic, NOTHING in the past is verifiable - including the extraordinary claims of Darwinian evolution.
By the way, the Resurrection of the Christ is entirely falsifiable. It is an event that took place within history. But you must use historical methods to disprove it, and shouldn't presuppose the non existence of a God who can act from within that history.
There is more historical/bibliographic evidence for the NT than any other document or writing from early Antiquity. Facts.
Also, it would've been VERY easy for the early Christianity movement to be squashed by the authorities (Roman and Jewish) that didn't want it around - provide the body! Go get the body of Jesus and parade it around town in front of all the crazy disciples preaching a resurrected Jesus. The Romans placed a seal on the tomb and place guards in front of it - punishable by death if anything happened to the tomb. They did this for fear that the disciples would steal the body. But they didn't/couldn't do it.
He rose from the dead and walked among us.
Romans 1:18-32
You think the past is verifiable? Who writes the history books? What is this website about? What are fighting? A massive illusion and control mechansim most people don't even know exists.... Right?
And yet you believe truth is some easily, equally accessible object we all can look at the "proofs" in the same way? We don't even know WTF is going on in Antartica. We can't even verify that NOW. But I'm to believe extraordinary claims that lack extraordinary evidence from thousands of years ago?
That religious book written by old dudes that never met Jesus... They're not to be questioned. Their motives aren't to be questioned. We just need to roll over and believe them? Our souls (no evidence of souls) depend on it. The case that a soul exists has never been made. The bible just treats it like it's a simple, easy to swallow assumption. Uhh, if you're gonna tell me about where my soul goes after my body dies... You're gonna need to make a case that souls exist and use supporting evidence instead of just conveniently glossing over it because it's problematic for you.
Anyways,
Go watch the video of Tucker Carlson handing Bill Nye his ass about climate change. Then read the comments... There are people out there that believe Tucker lost that debate.
Perspective is everything.
Yes
In the case of the Bible? The losers. They were getting killed for their beliefs in the first and second century. Had to write letters to each other, and read them in caves and catacombs.
Yup - with an open mind.
Book a trip and go there to verify.
Claims about the extraordinary don't need "extraordinary" evidence - just good evidence that stands up to reasoning and hard questions.
False. They were contemporaries of Jesus. Eyewitnesses to his life and resurrection. If not direct, first person eyewitnesses, then they were one step removed. Even Atheist Bart Ehrman (Biblical historian) wouldn't go as far as saying what you say here.
Absolutely not! Never just roll over and believe something with out questioning it! You have good questions and doubts! And there are good answers to those questions and doubts!
No, nobody that wrote the bible knew Jesus... The stories were passed down for decades... Upwards of 50 years AFTER it was all over with. We don't know who wrote the books in the bible... The authors didn't sign their names... Some group of men made that decision... Probably the same group of men that decided which books would make up the bible and which ones would not.
And at no point in that very clean, uncompormisable process could things get fucked up (assuming a magical deity did send himself on a suicide mission to save us from himself if we don't accept his "gift" because he loves us so much but only if we believe in him.
But regardless... I care not about the evidences of God and the bible... Like I said, he's not worthy of my endorsement... His version of good and love are not my versions of good and love. Asking a father to kill his only son for you is shitty. A father doing it to appease his god, is shitty. God killing all the first born because he has a beef with Pharoah is shitty. Cursing 10 generations deep because some loser in the desert didn't keep a law is shitty. Treating women as property and the spoils of war, is shitty.
Again, not anyone worthy of my endorsement.