₦airaland Forum

@frizy

I will try and gloss over your convoluted grammar and try to make sense of what you have just written. It may be hard sha but i go try, sigh!

The Qu'ran seems to delude many who don't believe the message. The Qu'ran, Torah and Gospel(given to Jesus) were messages from Moses, Jesus and inspired in Mohamme'd

So in a nut shell, your saying islam came last since it was the last faith to have any iota of thinking to establish its own first? Ok i will take you for your humility

And trust me, the messages passed by moses and jesus are the most primitive and grossly unbelievable messages ever trumped up anyone. Your doing your faith no good by refering to the quoran as messages from primitive goat herders.

The Qu'ran is not a plagiarised copy of the Bible rather a Confirmation of whatever Scriptures that came before it

Hmm this is also an interesting preposition, bearing in mind the christian faith is totally the king of a plagiarized version of pagan faith which actually brings nothing new in any way.

Some people actually believe that just because so much voice and ink has spread the word of a character named Jesus throughout history, that this must mean that he actually lived. This argument simply does not hold. The number of people who believe or write about something or the professional degrees they hold say nothing at all about fact. Facts derive out of evidence, not from hearsay, not from hubris scholars, and certainly not from faithful believers. Regardless of the position or admiration held by a scholar, believer, or priest, if he or she cannot support their hypothesis with good evidence, then it can only remain a hypothesis.

While the possibility exists that an actual Jesus lived, a more likely possibility reveals that a mythology could have arrived totally out of earlier mythologies. Although we have no evidence for a historical Jesus, we certainly have many accounts for the mythologies of the Middle East and Egypt during the first century and before. Many of these stories appear similar to the Christ saviour story.

Just before and during the first century, the Jews had prophesied about an upcoming Messiah based on Jewish scripture. Their beliefs influenced many of their followers. We know that powerful beliefs can create self-fulfilling prophesies, and surely this proved just as true in ancient times. It served as a popular dream expressed in Hebrew Scripture for the promise of an "end-time" with a savior to lead them to the promised land. Indeed, Roman records show executions of several would-be Messiahs, (but not a single record mentions a Jesus). Many ancients believed that there could come a final war against the "Sons of Darkness"-- the Romans.

This then could very well have served as the ignition and flame for the future growth of Christianity. We know that the early Christians lived within pagan communities. Jewish scriptural beliefs coupled with the pagan myths of the time give sufficient information about how such a religion could have formed. Many of the Hellenistic and pagan myths parallel so closely to the alleged Jesus that to ignore its similarities means to ignore the mythological beliefs of history. Dozens of similar savior stories propagated the minds of humans long before the alleged life of Jesus. Virtually nothing about Jesus "the Christ" came to the Christians as original or new.

For example, the religion of Zoroaster, founded circa 628-551 B.C.E. in ancient Persia, roused mankind in the need for hating a devil, the belief of a paradise, last judgment and resurrection of the dead. Mithraism, an offshoot of Zoroastrianism probably influenced early Christianity. The Magi described in the New Testament appears as Zoroastrian priests. Note the word "paradise" came from the Persian pairidaeza.

The Egyptian mythical Horus, god of light and goodness has many parallels to Jesus. For some examples:

Horus and the Father as one
Horus, the Father seen in the Son
Horus, light of the world, represented by the symbolical eye, the sign of salvation.
Horus served the way, the truth, the life by name and in person
Horus baptized with water by Anup (Jesus baptized with water by John)
Horus the Good Shepherd
Horus as the Lamb (Jesus as the Lamb)
Horus as the Lion (Jesus as the Lion)
Horus identified with the Tat Cross (Jesus with the cross)
The trinity of Atum the Father, Horus the Son, Ra the Holy Spirit
Horus the avenger (Jesus who brings the sword)
Horus the afflicted one
Horus as life eternal
Twelve followers of Horus as Har-Khutti (Jesus' 12 disciples)


The mythical Messiah is Horus in the Osirian Mythos; Har-Khuti in the Sut-Typhonian; Khunsu in that of Amen-Ra; Iu in the cult of Atum-Ra; and the Christ of the Gospels is an amalgam of all these characters.

Osiris, Hercules, Mithra, Hermes, Prometheus, Perseus and others compare to the Christian myth andl served as pre-Christian sun gods, yet all allegedly had gods for fathers, virgins for mothers; had their births announced by stars; got born on the solstice around December 25th; had tyrants who tried to kill them in their infancy; met violent deaths; rose from the dead; and nearly all got worshiped by "wise men" and had allegedly fasted for forty days.

The pre-Christian cult of Mithra had a deity of light and truth, son of the Most High, fought against evil, presented the idea of the Logos. Pagan Mithraism mysteries had the burial in a rock tomb, resurrection, sacrament of bread & water (Eucharist), the marking on the forehead with a mystic mark, the symbol of the Rock, the Seven Spirits and seven stars, all before the advent of Christianity.

Even Justin Martyr recognized the analogies between Christianity and Paganism. To the Pagans, he wrote: "When we say that the Word, who is first born of God, was produced without sexual union, and that he, Jesus Christ, our teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven; we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter (Zeus)."

Virtually all of the mythical accounts of a savior Jesus have parallels to past pagan mythologies which existed long before Christianity and from the Jewish scriptures that we now call the Old Testament. The accounts of these myths say nothing about historical reality, but they do say a lot about believers, how they believed, and how their beliefs spread.

In the book The Jesus Puzzle, the biblical scholar, Earl Doherty, presents not only a challenge to the existence of an historical Jesus but reveals that early pre-Gospel Christian documents show that the concept of Jesus sprang from non-historical spiritual beliefs of a Christ derived from Jewish scripture and Hellenized myths of savior gods. Nowhere do any of the New Testament epistle writers describe a human Jesus, including Paul. None of the epistles mention a Jesus from Nazareth, an earthly teacher, or as a human miracle worker. Nowhere do we find these writers quoting Jesus. Nowhere do we find them describing any details of Jesus' life on earth or his followers. Nowhere do we find the epistle writers even using the word "disciple" (they of course use the term "apostle" but the word simply means messenger, as Paul saw himself). Except for two well known interpolations, Jesus always gets presented as a spiritual being that existed before all time with God, and that knowledge of Christ came directly from God or as a revelation from the word of scripture. Doherty writes, "Christian documents outside the Gospels, even at the end of the first century and beyond, show no evidence that any tradition about an earthly life and ministry of Jesus were in circulation."

Furthermore, the epistle to the Hebrews (8:4), makes it explicitly clear that the epistle writer did not believe in a historical Jesus: "If He [Jesus] had been on earth, He would not be a priest."

These early historical documents can prove nothing about an actual Jesus but they do show an evolution of belief derived from varied and diverse concepts of Christianity, starting from a purely spiritual form of Christ to a human figure who embodied that spirit, as portrayed in the Gospels. The New Testament stories appears as an eclectic hodgepodge of Jewish, Hellenized and pagan stories compiled by pietistic believers to appeal to an audience for their particular religious times.

With this in mind, i hope you frizy can comfortably say again that islam is an amalgamation of false pagan pre christian beliefs which the quoran gladly would say is a Confirmation of whatever Scriptures that came before it 

Though you may critize the Qu'ran can the head of your atheist movement write a book with no detect/conflict or errors in his philosophy. Muhamme'd was an illerate and no scholar/writer can write its like. Never

1. No atheist will be so dumb as to interpolate events that never took place and gladly hang unto straws when it is non existent. We think like rational human beings and question the veracity of claims and need evidence to suppose those claims. When it becomes imaginary or shaky, an atheist will gladly step away and not add to the controversy but when the thesist like you continue to hammer that need to follow your religion, we pick out the loop holes and expose your stupidity.

2. No atheist write books without opening the book to scrutiny and criticisms. That is the difference between atheists and religious apologists. We are open to question "how, why, when and what". Religious apologists accept the bible and quoran with such stoic and glibble stuborness that when ever they are faced with mirad of questions about their faith, they only resort to either violence, curses, false prayers, shock and disbelief and are quick to call the person a satanist, athiest, devilish, infidel, anti-christ, your hell will be hotter than the gas cooker, blah blah blah, as if that changes the question of "how, why, when and what"

3. Also am glad you confessed that mohammed was an illiterate because i have being shouting on this forum that these authors were primitive goat herders who saw the world from their very primitive state of mind and cannot be used today to justify the happenings of the mordern day world.

Besides i listen to educated men with loads of rational thinkings and not primitive illiterates like mohammed and all the writers in the bible, pfffffffss  

This is simple, am not defending christains, am only proving that the Noahs' story is true.

How can you say your not defending christians and still saying that psycho babble story of noah is true? Talk about being delusional in a tautological way!

Despite all the evidence that i have raised that no one has counter attacked, you still raise your voice to say its true. Kai!

As unbeliever like you, do you think God doesn't requite the wrong of people?He can do all things, and His mercy has over come His anger. When people do evil things hurricanes,sunami,earthquake occurs. There are so many verses in the Qu'ran make Mus'lims know. But the Believers are saved. The reason why Nigeria has no such thing despite of great sins is that they are still some people God loves living there or God may command it one day( I pray not).

Rubbish! Are you freaking delusional or what

How can you say that because people do bad things, ( hurricanes,sunami,earthquake occurs)? This is probably more senseless than what those primitive cattle rearers have written in the quoran or bible. How do you justify killing 200000 in hurricane katrina that washed away churches and mosques and destroyed temples and other so called god artifacts especially the killing of good people? Are you saying all the people that died in the hurricane were bad people? Why did pastor bimbo odukoya die in a plane crash?, hmm let me guess she was bad so god couldnt miraculously save her? Bullshit. All the typhoons, twisters, earthquakes, floods and every conceivable natural disaster is caused by god and he is mercilessly wicked to kill people during his fit of tantrums that results in these mishap and you say its because people are evil.

Hilter is different and am sure he is regretting it already in this grave.God has the right to do His wish, none can change it, but not unjustly, He is best of those who are Just.Their punishment was justified.

Nonsense!

A murderer is a murder! Both god and hitler are the same thing and he's even worse since the quoran and bible says he is well experienced in being a serial killer that massacred people for over 5,000 years or so So dont even try to pamper god over hitler or saddam or abacha. They all belong to that club of mass murders and killers!

In the book of Exodus chapter 12 verse 28, God writes about one of his early massacres:

So the people of Israel did just as the LORD had commanded through Moses and Aaron. And at midnight the LORD killed all the firstborn sons in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn son of Pharaoh, who sat on the throne, to the firstborn son of the captive in the dungeon. Even the firstborn of their livestock were killed. Pharaoh and his officials and all the people of Egypt woke up during the night, and loud wailing was heard throughout the land of Egypt. There was not a single house where someone had not died.

Here the death of the children is directly at the hand of God.

In Isaiah chapter 13, God paints this word picture:

Anyone who is captured will be run through with a sword. Their little children will be dashed to death right before their eyes. Their homes will be sacked and their wives raped by the attacking hordes. For I will stir up the Medes against Babylon, and no amount of silver or gold will buy them off. The attacking armies will shoot down the young people with
arrows.

They will have no mercy on helpless babies and will show no compassion for the children.
What a lovely image.

In Jeremiah chapter 49, verse 20, God paints a similar picture:

Therefore hear the plan which the LORD has made against Edom and the purposes which he has formed against the inhabitants of Teman: Even the little ones of the flock shall be dragged away; surely their fold shall be appalled at their fate. At the sound of their fall the earth shall tremble; the sound of their cry shall be heard at the Red Sea.

In Hosea chapter 13, God paints a similar picture:

Samaria shall bear her guilt, because she has rebelled against her God; they shall fall by the sword, their little ones shall be dashed in pieces, and their pregnant women ripped open. Shocking and disgusting

In Numbers chapter 31, God paints a similar picture:

Moses said to them, "Have you let all the women live? Behold, these caused the people of Israel, by the counsel of Balaam, to act treacherously against the LORD in the matter of Pe'or, and so the plague came among the congregation of the LORD. Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man by lying with him. But all the young girls who have not known man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.
Here Moses, acting as an agent of God, specifies that thousands of male babies and children be killed, as well as thousands of women. The Bible states in verse 35 that the captured women numbered "thirty-two thousand persons in all, women who had not known man by lying with him." This was not a small attack. Tens of thousands men, women and children were massacred.

In Deuteronomy Chapter 3 we find this:

Next we turned and went up along the road toward Bashan, and Og king of Bashan with his whole army marched out to meet us in battle at Edrei. The LORD said to me, "Do not be afraid of him, for I have handed him over to you with his whole army and his land. Do to him what you did to Sihon king of the Amorites, who reigned in Heshbon." So the LORD our God also gave into our hands Og king of Bashan and all his army. We struck them down, leaving no survivors. At that time we took all his cities. There was not one of the sixty cities that we did not take from them—the whole region of Argob, Og's kingdom in Bashan. All these cities were fortified with high walls and with gates and bars, and there were also a great many unwalled villages. We completely destroyed them, as we had done with Sihon king of Heshbon, destroying every city—men, women and children. But all the livestock and the plunder from their cities we carried off for ourselves.

They massacred all the men, women and children in 60 cities at God's request.

Then there is Noah's flood, in which God massacred every single child on the face of the earth.

It is appropriate at this point to speak to Christians, especially the "casual Christians" who go to church occasionally because it seems like the "right thing to do." Most Christians have never read the Bible. They have no idea that the God of the Bible is a huge proponent of slavery, or that God hates women, or that God finds the annihilation of small children so enthralling. Should we, as human beings living in the modern world, be worshipping a God like this? 

Doesn't it feel odd to find all of this material in the Bible? Especially the quote from Moses in Numbers 31. You may recall that the sixth commandment is, "Thou shalt not kill."

What does God have against children? Why would an all-loving, all-knowing being act in this way? In the case of Herod's massacre, a religious person might say, "God had to do it to fulfill a prophecy in the Bible." But that makes no sense, because God could have left the prophecy out.

A normal person, after reading passages like these, is left first with a deep sense of disgust. Any normal human being knows that these acts are monstrous. What we are seeing here is not a loving God, but instead a demonic executioner working at a massive scale. Why would anyone worship this appalling monster?

A normal person then asks the obvious question: Did God actually. But i guess your not normal and extremely delusional to assume god didnt do any of it. So much for a merciful god

Unborn/unmatured children there is no sin. Muhamme'd the greatest man ever on earth explained how God will deal justly among them on the day of judgement.

This is an extremely senseless post so i'll just gloss over it

The Qu'ran says: Get out of the ship O Noah, there will be among nations, and they will live and enjoy the earth a long-while but We will seize them suddenly for their sins. (This nations may be the present).

Please explain this mumbo jumbo because i dont understand a word of it except the fake allusion to noah who obviously couldnt exist at the age of 600 and still build a 5 million pound ship with only 7 more people.

And as your whining about punishment, punishment exists to correct wrongs and act as a deterrent to future wrong doers. What has wiping out a whole planet got to do with punishment? What has a senseless massacre of pregnant women and babies got to do with punishment?

Please go and throw that book away and read something more constructive  say " harry porter novels". Because you have a long way to go before you reach advanced religious books!

Heeeeeeeeeheeeee! So this is were you are hidding carlosein huh! Your catholic! Haaaaaaaa! Of all the christian apologists to toy around with, catholics are my favourite since they actually hold the key to the new version of christianity and contributed immensely to the distorted parts of the bible, the tortures, burning of books, false misrepresentations of the bible, hallucinations and the wars of the dark ages. In fact any angle i pick to aim my gun would definately be worth a shot!, lol

Dont worry when am in the mood, i'll probably come back to see how extremely delusional you guys are especially with the virgin mary bunkum you guys love not to shut up about!

I wonder which one i should believe in, hmm, catholic virgin mary if i go to heaven or the 72 virgins allah promised his faithfuls if they get to heaven, heeeeee!

Probably take virgin atlantic to get round up all the virgins since they all belong to me!

Carlosein:
do you know Sun God, IMHO, if u lived in Noah's time, you certainly would have missed the ark and drowned!!!

@carlosein

Your probably right. Since god had a strong bias for young men under the ages of 500 like Noah or his sons who were around 100 and something. There was no way a young man either good or bad would have escaped into the ark. Lets not even think of the over 4,000 species of animals in the ark that finally made it almost impossible for anyone to enter.

Even if jesus was around then, he would have still massacred him too. jesus was definately less than 100 years. It was just a plain bias again old men V youthful trendy and urbane young men and women. Talkless of the infanticide that he commited against babies, Pheeew, What a repugnant god to follow!

@still water

Mock me all you want as a christian I was clearly ascertained of that and it would take more than the usual delusional  mode of escape of an atheist to ruffle my feathers concerning my faith. Cheers, Please make your next post longer, you kind of slowed down on the last one, cheers   See you soon

You remind me of all those little sunday sunday girls that wear their sunday best and carry a 2b note book and look all that holy and innocent on a sunday morning that would probably sit in the front row in church, sing the loudest and pray the hardest for all to notice and jot down everything pastor lagbaja has said and ponder on it so seriously in church that you would even be one day short of being an usher or assistant minister but outside the church, your an embarrasment to your faith because you cant even defend what your pastor taught you. You can even dub from your 2b notebook of jottings to even defend your faith because you know it bullshit and your lack the understanding of what you preach. But when they ask you are you a born again, You will be the first person to say "I have accepted jesus as my lord and saviour" but you dont even know how to defend what you accept.


Just shows how delusional, obtuse and irrational you can be. All i asked was to justify the story and give it some credibility but all you have done so far is dodge the bullet and make matters worse for more atheists to laugh at the imbecility of christians.

Once again thanks for being an embarassment to the christian community. We love to pick on little hypocritics like you

@frizy

Haaaaaaaaaaaaa! Coming from someone that believes in 72 virgins waiting for you in heaven is arguably the biggest joke of the day! I purposely refuse to indulge in the issue of the quoran or mohammed or the grand delusions of the the quoran because its more laughable than the christians to say the least. Your shameful plagiarism of the christian faith is even more appalling and i dont have time to deal with the plagiarizers. I rather deal with the real authors of the hog-wash called the bible. So dont even bother to engage me in an atheist/ islamic discuss because i dont believe in virgins talkless of 72 of them all waiting for me!  

Anyway to the topic at hand. The grand delusion of the noah's ark

According to the Qu'ran, Noah(p.b.u.h) was building the ark because his people were rebellious and All'ah justified His wrath upon them by causing the earth to shower rain from the heavens and from itself. The like of two creatures were taken, people who believed with him; BUT his son was not saved because

When they say common sense is not that common, i strongly believe you fall under that category of gullible religious apologists. For even coming out to defend such psycho-babble that even christian apologists cannot even raise a wimper of their voice to defend such absurdities shows how easily you would love to the sacrificial lamb of the christian apologists.

How can you open your mouth and proclaim that Allah Justified his wrath upon them by raining showers and to put it more succiently the christians would have it, "made it rain for 40 days and 40 nights to kill and wipe out a generation"

How can you turn a blind eye to the monsterous atrocities of this. Killing a whole generation of thousands or millions of people just because he was angry? how can you not see the genocide or pogrom commited by one the christians or even you call as allah as so loving, forgiving and merciful? Does this act of cowardice, destruction or dispeakable act of wickedness justify someone to worship such a callous monster?

While it might sound right to only look at noah and read the passage passively, you should also look at the meaning of the wrath and havoc god caused on mankind by the killing and senseless murder by god. No one who ever existed and wielded such power can be this evil. Even Hitler would look back at his crimes and say "Well god murdered more people than me so why are you castigating me?"

Did you for once think of the babies and pregnant women that god killed in their thousands? Babies and little children that couldnt differentiate between right and wrong! Rwanda genocide, Saddam's chemical weapons, sierraleone and liberia wars, bosnia wars, the biafra wars are childs play compared to the mass destruction perpertuated by god or allah! Babies Haba!

This seems an incredibly complex way to go about ridding the world of sinners, doesn't it? Not only that, it doesn't seem to have actually worked. If God intended to re-breed the human race from the pure and virtuous Noah, why do we see so much "sin" in the world today? Surely God would have foreseen the outcome? I suppose it could be argued that the troubles in the world today are as nothing compared with that in Noah's time, but I don't think the people around Noah had problems with drugs, schoolchildren with assault rifles, and weapons of mass destruction (apart from God, of course). If the world today is at least as bad as Noah's world, why did God bother? Maybe he cannot see the future?

So dont even come here and try and justify such atrocities and worship such a monster because no one capable of such evil is worth respecting or being treated as a living god. No sane and rational mind can comprehend such a a diabolical being as something that i should pray too.

Tasma:
Well not all christians are literal believers in the Bible. There are a lot of Christians that take stories such as Noah's Ark as largely metaphorical. It should be possible to pass the message of Christianity - love for it other and belief in God - without insisting on a literal interpretation of the Bible.

METAPHORICAL!

I wonder what the pope, pastors or church ministers would say after reading your post

I guess that sums it up nicely to say the whole bible is just a literal piece of fiction or unrefined senseless garbage that shouldnt be taken seriously since it is largely filled with metaphorical stories that would largely confuse your head if you for one minute think of it as a true life story. The story of Noah's Ark is just a classic example of how extreme man kind has been bamboozled to believe such hypocrisy by christians and pointing it out seems to embarrass them even more especially when no one ( Not even the self professed Jehovah witnesses, pentecostal fundamentalists, catholic rabble rousers or white garmenters, lol, May be Imams have a better explanation for this since it totally devoid of logic) can come up with such a tangible defense.

Am glad some christians can actually speak the truth for once no matter how hard it might seem and painful to christian apologists.

The bible can be likened to the Charly Boy Show's slogan which says "If you believe anything that is in there, you definately must get your head Checked"

stillwater:
Wow, someone is ready for a fight, such energy and long speech, you must have prepared hard .

I knew it was just a matter of time your true colors would outshine your initial post of trying to be sarcastic but meanwhile you were desperately trying to have a moment of fame. I have given you the opportunity, now you can begin dancing your native dance with your traditional costume. First of all I'm nobody's bodyguard. To each his own. Secondly I find it detestable you used such words at me for being female. You might think yourself funny or rather sound intelligent but never you stoop to the lowest of words in reference to my answers to your points in future. My gender should not be a yardstick to resort to insolence in order to relay your point. I detest the word rape no matter the contest of it being used. If you hate christianity, do not make it into a subject to demean my sex. That I will most definitely not take kindly with you, ok.

Delusions *yawns* the usual atheist rabble and antagonistic word to make them feel rational. Lmao. Come up with another word please. That one has lost its savor . As I said earlier on, since your lazy butt cannot imagine a ship made of wood that is far beyond your understanding, spare me your myopic state of mind and join the thread I referred you to earlier on and spew your logical mind to us once more. I enjoy knowing you can't deny the fact you never heard of Jesus. Cheers and have a jolly ride on your ark.

This is definately the height of idiocy. You really cannot even offer a whimper of hope to your fellow christian army by coming out with a tangible defense to negate this grossly unbelievable story of Noah's Ark, instead you choose to beat around the bush by talking about sexism and being a female blah blah blah as if that has got anything to do with the lies that christians spew out everyday.

What is more reprehensible is the way you choose to dodge the bullet with innuendoes like dancing with native costumes and only imbecilic minds can stoop so low to try and reverse a topic that doesnt even show an iota of intelligence in your supposedly impeccable gift of christian garb!

Besides your poor knowledge of the English language should also be likened to the primitive goat herders that wrote the bible. if i remember correctly i said i would "VERBALLY RAPE YOU" I choose my phrases correctly and if you don't understand what it means, then i can safely conclude that your from the poor school of knowledge just like your biblical authors.

Anyway staying with the topic at hand, you actually are a very very poor imitation of a christian apologist. For you to confirm that a ship that large can be made with wood alone without it posing any difficulties really shows how dense you are just like your biblical authors. With the over whelming evidence to show how impossible and implausible it is, you still retirate such banalities which much aplomb, lol, How laughable!

Also talking about being delusional is something you should consider very very seriously. I have said you and all the christian apologists are delusional to buy into such mumbo jumbo like the ark and the burden of proof is on you to tell me am wrong and point out how delusional i am in my thinking, but instead, you go down without a whimper of a fight and give me the most ridiculous answer ever conjured by a christian before and you still expect me not to believe that your an upgrade in delusional matters?

Also i have heard of jesus, buddah, janus, venus and a host of imaginary pagan gods and the fact that you asked me whether i have heard of him still makes me wonder if you just read your bible like a zombie without asking any rational questions? I have more than enough proofs to show jesus doesnt exist just like leprechauns, zombies, vampires and Santa Claus. So if your telling me whether i have heard of jesus, i really have to question your state of mind and probably pass you off as a nut -job!     

Once again grow out of your ignorance and explain why the ark is not the most senseless story you have ever heard instead of beating around the bush aimlessly and taking that ever tired christian excuse of ignoring the question when you don't have a plausible answer to defend a faith you so hypocritically love to expound to people just as ignorant as you!

Psssssssssssfffffff!

p:s:I Am still waiting for the threat that you said you won't take kindly with me! Anyway i wont be suprised. Its a christian thing. Remember god said "Vengeance is mine"

bawomolo:
you are new here, engaging them in conversation is just have fruitless. u would just have a whole bunch of christians praying for u or accusing u of being the devil.

Of course that is their only game plan. When your ignorant about something you only take solace in self pity and insults so am used to it. Besides if they tell me they will pray for me, we would have to define what a prayer is or what effect it has on mankind and that will obviously lead them to point zero and expose their idiocy even more.

If they use the devil mantra, it would even be less challenging because the devil just like jesus and god doesnt exist. So who are they talking about. Calling me an imaginary thing? For everytime they call me a devil, i will tell them to call me Santa claus too. They both share the same thing, (Imaginary figures)

Shit! i almost forget Mr snufflephagus! The imaginary elephant friend that only Big bird in sesame street only seems to see!

The crucifixion and Easter story is mythical and a major farcade and i will point out the major inadequacies:

1. Jesus could have survived the crucifixion. Crucifixion was intended to be a slow torture, lasting for several days. Jesus, however, was crucified on the eve of the Sabbath, when Jesus would have known it was customary to remove the torture victims that evening. ( Was the supposedly son of god that weak when he knew in few hours he would have been let loose?) Jesus didn't spend several days on the cross; instead, he spent several hours.

2.The gospels contradict themselves on this matter. John says Jesus was crucified at noon, while Mark says it was the third hour, or 9:00 a.m. (Jn 19.14, Mk 15.25). In any event, Jesus spent from three to six hours hanging from a cross, torture that traditionally was survived for three to six days."

3. The accounts of Matthew, Mark and Luke contradict each other, even on the parts of Christian mythology which Christians consider to be the most important: The crucifixion and resurrection. They give different sets of final words, confusingly differents accounts of the empty tomb (one of them including an earthquake), and wildly different accounts of the resurrection. They're all making it up!

Jesus' last words, according to Matthew 27:46 and Mark 15:34, were to quote Psalm 22, 'My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?' "But Luke has Jesus quote psalm 31: 'Father, into your hands I commend my spirit'. [Also] John's account, in which Jesus says [, ] 'It is finished' [John 19:28-30]"Freke & Gandy, p173. It seems that Jesus' disciples do not know his last words.

Once Jesus has died, Mark tells us that Pilate is surprised when Jesus has died quickly on the cross (Mark 15:44). This contradicts the gospel of John, where Pilate himself gives the order that Jesus' legs are broken and he be stabbed with a spear in order to quicken his death. ( Who is lying here now)

The empty tomb, according to the Gospel of Mark, was found by some women, who saw a young man in a white robe inside. But Luke says that, actually, what happened was two men in brilliant clothes suddenly appeared by their side (there is no 'man in a white robe' inside the cave). Matthew embellishes the story with an earthquake and has an angel with a face like lightening roll the stone away. Mark's sombre account looks starkly empty in comparison to the other gospels! ( The lies by supposedly jesus eyewitnesses gets more embarrassingly scandalous)

4. When Jesus was resurrected after his death, like various other Roman pagan sun-gods, he appeared to various people. Mark's account contradicts Luke and Acts:

"In Mark and Matthew, the resurrected Jesus appears to his other disciples in Galilee, where they have been specifically sent by divine decree. [But] Luke and the author of the Acts of the Apostles have the risen Jesus appearing in and around Jerusalem [and] not only did they not receive any divine commandment to go to Galilee, but were expressly forbidden to leave Jerusalem." ( Please help me which one do i have to believe now?)

To even go further with the way the gospel has been tampered makes it even look more absurd and unrealistic to believe:

The earliest Gospel account is by Mark. The ending of Mark (Mark 16:9-20) was added later. The account of the resurrection in verses 1-8 does not mention any appearances by Jesus. We can see that the appearances of Jesus were literally 'firmed up' as each Gospel was written, until by John's Gospel we have a totally physical Jesus, in great contrast to the appearances in 1 Corinthians 15.

It became more and more dogmatic as time went on that the resurrected Jesus was a physical body. If, in the opinions of the scribes, the Gospels were not clear enough that Jesus's body was physical, then they would alter the Gospels to make certain that was the case. Take Luke's account. There are 5 clear instances in Luke's Gospel.


Luke 23:53
In Luke 23:53, it says that Jesus was placed in a tomb "where no-one had ever yet been laid". Just to make sure that nobody could argue that people stole Jesus's body, some scribes added the words "and he rolled a great stone before the door of the tomb". No less a manuscript than Codex Bezae was altered to add "and having placed him there he positioned before the tomb a stone that scarcely twenty people could roll."


Luke 24:12
Luke 24:12 reads "But Peter, rising up, ran to the tomb; and stooping down he saw the linen cloths alone, and he returned home marvelling at what had happened.". This was just after Luke writes that the disciples did not believe the women , whose words seemed nonsense to them. This verse is missing from Codex Bezae and some other manuscripts. The text varies in other manuscripts. Why would this verse be dropped from Codex Bezae by a scribe, especially given the reluctance of scribes to delete anything from the text? There are far more than insertions than deletions, especially in the Codex Bezae, which is notorious for adding stuff.

Was this verse added by a scribe so that it could be shown that somebody found the witnesses to the resurrection to be credible? If it was not added, then some scribes must have chosen to delete it. Why on earth would they do that?


The verse is very similar to Peter's rushing to the tomb in John 20:3-10. The word for the linen cloths in Luke 24:12 (othonia) is not the word that Luke has just used in Luke 23:53. (sindoni)

This one verse (Luke 24:12) has 3 words or phrases used nowhere else in Luke or Acts. It also uses an "historic present", which Luke shuns elsewhere, - for example of the 93 historic presents in the Markan verses that Luke used, no less than 92 were changed by him.

By this, I mean that Luke uses 'he sees', when everything else in Chapter 24 is in the past tense. Notice that the NIV translates that as 'he saw'. Even they recognise that writers do not suddenly change tense for no good reason.

Luke 24:12 uses words for 'stooping down', 'the linen clothes', 'went away home' , which are never used elsewhere in Luke or Acts.

Exactly those words in Luke 24:12 which are not otherwise in Luke-Acts are in John 20, with John 20:5, being very close indeed.

There is an Illustrations page available for readers to double check my claims.

Clearly, a scribe has added in the verse. It is missing from important manuscripts, it has many non-Lukan features, but features which resemble John's Gospel and it is impossible to see why a scribe would ever have wanted to delete the verse.


Luke 24:40
Codex Bezae does not include Luke 24:40 - "having said this, he showed them his hands and feet". Either some scribe added this verse, or some scribe dropped it. It is hard to see why any scribe would drop the verse. It is easy to see why a scribe would add the verse, basing it on John 20:20. He would have had to alter it as John 20:20 mentions 'hands and side' and there was no spear-thrust in Luke's Gospel, but that would only be a small change. It would all help to show that the Gospels "recorded" a physical resurrection.


Luke 24:3
In Luke 24:3,Codex Bezae and most of the Old Latin texts do not have the phrase "the Lord Jesus" in "they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus." Clearly, the phrase "the Lord Jesus" was added by a scribe to make sure that the Gospels recorded that the women went to the right tomb. The phrase "the Lord Jesus" only occurs in the Gospels here and in Mark 16:19 (another addition by a scribe!) and it is hard to see why the phrase would have been dropped if it were original to Luke's Gospel.


Luke 24:6
In Luke 24:6,Codex Bezae and most of the Old Latin texts do not have the phrase "He is not here, but has been raised". Clearly, this phrase was added by a scribe to make sure that the women knew that Jesus had been raised It is hard to see why the phrase would have been dropped if it were original to Luke's Gospel.


Conclusion
We have clear evidence that Christians tampered with the text of the Gospels to make them better evidence for the Resurrection. How much tampering went on that we don't have evidence of?


Lets even take pauls own grand delusions that christians have been clinging unto:



Not one of these accounts is contemporary to the Easter Sunday in question. The earliest is by Paul in 1 Corinthians 15. I aim to show that Paul's understanding of the Resurrection is totally different from the Gospel accounts.


Paul's Account
1 Corinthians 15:3-9 'For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than 500 brethren at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me.'

These famous words are the earliest words we have describing the Resurrection. Let me pick this apart into tiny pieces. Notice that this evidence never mentions the time or place of any of these appearances. The most basic documentation is missing.

The Gospels are adamant that Jesus was buried in a tomb near or in Jerusalem , that there was a guard at a tomb, that women visited the tomb early, that there were earthquakes, angels, burial shrouds left behind , that Jesus was touched and ate bread etc etc.

Paul, in a letter saying what was of first importance to people who doubted that the resurrection had happened, could not be bothered to mention any of the proofs that the Gospels , 20 or 30 years later, would give. Perhaps he didn't know of them. Perhaps he didn't think that the Gospel stories were important.


In turn the Gospel writers leave out such convincing evidences as an appearance to 500 brethren or an appearance to James, the leader of the Christian Church in Jerusalem. The appearances described by Paul clash head-on with the appearances in the Gospels. Remember that Jesus could not have appeared to the 'twelve' as Paul said, as Judas was dead.

( How is it possible he appeared to 12 people when the bible said judas killed himself? If my maths is that bad i know it remains 11 but where did the 12th Apostle come from?)

'that he was buried' Paul uses the word 'etaphe'. This is just the normal word for burial. It is used in the Gospels in such phrases as 'Let the dead bury the dead', or 'The rich man died and was also buried' (Luke 16:23). There is no meaning of 'entombed' in the word Paul uses. There is a word for 'entombed', and it is used in the Gospels, but not by Paul.

'that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures'. Which scriptures? Hosea 6:2 is probably what Paul had in mind, but it is not about a Messiah. In context, it is about Israel repenting and being restored. Note that Paul never states that Jesus was 'raised on the third day in accordance with eye-witness testimony'. He gives no hint that any of these appearances took place on the third day.

If fact i could go on and on to dismantle such farcades and beliefs. Simply put, the bible was written by a bunch of Primitive cattle herders who had no iota of intelligence to construct events properly and had to fabricate stories shamelessly from Pre-christian pagan rituals of resurrection to claim as theirs.

Pffffffssss! Rubbish

@bawomolo

My guy, in as much as i enjoy your posts and contradictions about the christian faith, i dont think your encouraging them to become less delusional in their thinking. By just posting quotes and counter quotes from their various bibles, your just making them shrug even more and dismiss it.

A better approach is to engage them in their stupidity and fallacy about the many sensless parts of the bible that makes an autistic slowpoke more intelligent than their most gifted pastor or pope. Its their bible and the ammunition is there. All you need to do is pull the trigger.

E.g ask them to defend why god is such a monster that authorizes the deaths of millions of people during the "Great flood of Noah" or "Authorizing the death of thousands of babies in Eygpt?" Only a monster worse than Hitler than do such.

Trust me apart from being speechless and trying to convolute idiotic answers to these queries, their self delusions will gradually be banished from their lives.

IDINRETE:
there is another problem of VENTILATION, the ark only had one window,

Gen 6:16, you shall make a window for the ark,

whoever wrote or redacted that silly Noahic story was delusional

Haaaaaaaaaaaa

And to think Billions of christians world wide actually believe in such insanity speaks alot about their state of mind and grandiose delusions.



The best part of it is that whenever something embarassing springs up from the bible that is unexplainable, they quietly withdraw to their shells and say "god know best" "we shouldnt question his work or story" even if the story is too unbelievable to be true and the height of mumbo jumbo!

Shame on you christians, shame on you!

Heheheeheeeeee! I knew it was just a matter of time before the DELUSIONAL CHRISTIAN SQUAD throws out one of its errant body guards and guess what its a female member! Its makes it more palatable to verbally rape you and throw you back to your delusional squad and help you and your fellow christian cohorts to come back with a more plausible argument.

[Anyway, because you Sun god cannot build an ark doesn't mean Noah and his sons with determination cannot accomplish a task that looks insurmountable to you probably due to lazyness and lack of skills on your part. Noah's ark wasn't a day's job but one that took decades to finish, fyi.

Hmm, laziness and lack of skills huh! and also determination on the part of 8 people huh!

Rubbish

The ship was stated to be 450 feet long and 75 feet wide and 45 feet high? right! now see the idiocy of your claims of dtermination and skill!

1. Wood is not structurally stong enough to build a vessel of that size. Even iron and bronze are too weak. You have to have modern steels to build a ship that big that won't break in half at the first wave. Even the navy's of the world tried building larger wooden ships in the early 19th century and proved by experiment that they aren't sound talkless of 8 people in 4,350 B.C. Besides how many FORESTS not bushes did Noah and his 3 sons have to have destroyed to build this gigantic thing?

2. The Bible tells us of the way humanity was rescued from the flood by a man called Noah, who was forewarned of the flood by God, and was instructed to build a large boat, or Ark, in which he should carry two (or more) of every kind of living thing. (Genesis 6:9 et seq.). The Bible also tells us the dimensions of the Ark; "This is how you are to build it: The ark is to be 450 feet long, 75 feet wide and 45 feet high. Make a roof for it and finish the ark to within 18 inches of the top. Put a door in the side of the ark and make lower, middle and upper decks." (Genesis 6:15-16). We are also told that the rain lasted for forty days and forty nights, after which the flood waters lasted a further 150 days. That makes a total of 190 days for which Noah and the animals were living inside the Ark.

Let us examine this account, and see if it is plausible. Firstly we will examine the case for building such a vessel, and then we shall examine the plausibility of gathering and storing all these animals at the story claims.


Boat building is a very difficult and skilled discipline. The Bible does not say if Noah had any profession, or indeed if he had any previous experience at boat building, but let us assume for sake of argument that he was fully proficient.

Building a boat of that size on his own would have been quite a task. Let us assume that his 3 children also helped too, reducing the time by a factor of four. Sadly the Bible doesn't tell us how long it took to build the Ark ( Contrary to stillwaters claim that it took decades)  , (Another silly example of how christian apologists fabricate stories and facts and if left unchecked for the next 20 years could find its way into the bible, lol)  but we could at least estimate it. Bear in mind that Noah would not have had access to any sort of advanced tools, probably not even a saw.

Now this boat has to be strong enough to hold elephants and the like. Let's estimate how much wood this would take.

Well the boat was 450 feet long. Let's assume an average tree is 30 feet tall and three feet thick. That means that, just to build the outside of the boat we would require over two hundred tree trunks. That's assuming they just use the tree trunks without splitting them - remember we're dealing with elephants here so the wood needs to be pretty strong. Now Noah didn't have modern tools, so we could probably say that it would take him the best part of a day to chop down a tree, chop off all the side branches, neaten it up and carry it back to the Ark. That means he's spent two thirds of a year just chopping down trees. That's ignoring the fact that moving all that wood a significant distance is going to become prohibitively difficult. Trees weigh an awful lot.

Building a modern ship takes years. The QE2, for example, took over two years to build in a large commercial dockyard employing thousands of people with modern equipment. Here we're considering one man and his three sons without so much as a screwdriver to their name. This is going to take an extremely long time. During that time the Ark would have needed to be waterproofed, protected from the many different kinds of problem to which wood is susceptible such as woodworm and mildew, and also protected from vandals and troublemakers intent on destroying Noah's project.

Furthermore, wood is not a particularly strong material, compared to modern ship-building materials such as steel. To build a boat of the dimensions indicated in the Genesis story seems impossible without some sort of metal framework holding it together.

Finally, the largest wooden ship ever built was the US.S. Wyoming, built in the first decade of the twentiath century with modern shipbuilding methods. It was more than 100 feet shorter than Noah's ark is claimed to have been. This ship represented a tremendous feat of engineering, and posed several substantial construction problems. Most notably, it required large iron strapping for support, just to hold the boat together. There is no possible way Noah could have built a boat 450 feet long which held together under its own weight, let alone also carried hundreds of thousands of animals, and floated on the tempestuous seas of the Biblical flood!

As an very amusing illustration of how difficult it would be for Noah to have built a boat of the dimensions given in the Bible, this page describes a modern attempt to rebuild the Ark according to its given dimensions. Note the following requirements;


3,000 tons of cement
Five bulldozers
76 cement pillars
34 sway-brace pillars
4-foot high, 9-inch wide foundation wall
Steel reinforcement rod
Anchor bolts
Substantial steel superstructure

This will take at least 29 years to construct. Then how on earth did Noah and his 3 kids plus women, heheehe construct this ark especially bearing in mind that slob Noah was probably getting old?


As you continue thinking about it, the questions keep coming.

For example, how did Noah build the boat? How could four men and four women find, harvest, season, transport, cut, shape, assemble and seal all of the trees needed for a ship 450 feet long and 75 feet wide? That is a huge ship. For comparison, the Mayflower (which brought the Pilgrims from England to America) was only about 95 feet long, 25 feet wide and displaced 180 tons. [ref] The Mayflower was a big boat able to hold over 100 people, but it was a tiny dot compared to the ark.

Using the simplest multiplication, the ark would encompass about 14 Mayflowers, and would therefore weigh at least 2 1/2  million Kilograms. However, because the ark is so much larger, it would have to be far stronger than the Mayflower, making it far heavier. The very largest ships built at the height of the wooden shipbuilding era (the late 1800s) had a maximum keel length of about 250 feet, and the ark is nearly twice that big. This was an amazing vessel. And it was all built by four men and four women.

It is impossible to imagine that eight people could build a boat that big. It is also impossible to imagine a 450 foot long wooden vessel.

The most idiotic aspect of this story has to do with the age of Noah at that time.

The first solution can be found with Genesis 5:32
And Noah was five hundred years old and Noah begot Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

Unless Noah had triplets we can look at this passage and determine that Noah began to have the first of these three (important) sons at the age of 500.

We can determine that Noah did not have triplets from Genesis 10:21

And children were born also to Shem, …,the brother of Japheth the elder.

The above can also be translated as ",the older brother of Japheth."
So we don't know for certain if Shem was the oldest, middle, or youngest. We do know that there was an age gap between at least two of the brothers mentioned in 10:21

We could conclude from the data that Shem was born when Noah was 502 years old, and Japheth or Ham were born when Noah was 500 years old.

Imagine a 500 YEAR OLD MAN BUILDING AN ARK THAT BIG

C'mon this has to be the greatest hocus pocus ever told to man kind and the worst part is that i havent even dwelt on the number of animals and space it would require to hold 2 animals of all kind and the feeding!

So much for still water and her laziness and determination.

Better go back to your pastors, priests or motivational speakers or who ever to educate you more and provide more ammunination to back up this biblical fallacy because so far, your embarrassing your christian community when you cant even defend what your faith preaches, lol

Your both delusional to say the very least

islam and christianity are all trumped up superstitions and fairy tales passed on over the centuries that have no shroud of evidence to convince a rational being whatsoever!

I dont know why i ended up reading the story of the Noah's Ark recently but honestly this is most disjointed and hopelessly unbelievable story that has ever been written and to make matters worse, its in the bible and christians say the bible is the word of god which in turn makes the bible more unbelievable every given moment.

For a refresher course, i have to recite what god wrote:

Noah's flood is described in the Bible's book of Genesis, chapters 6 through 9. Here are two quotes from these chapters that touch on the high points:

[b]So make yourself an ark of cypress wood; make rooms in it and coat it with pitch inside and out. This is how you are to build it: The ark is to be 450 feet long, 75 feet wide and 45 feet high. Make a roof for it and finish the ark to within 18 inches of the top. Put a door in the side of the ark and make lower, middle and upper decks. I am going to bring floodwaters on the earth to destroy all life under the heavens, every creature that has the breath of life in it. Everything on earth will perish. But I will establish my covenant with you, and you will enter the ark-you and your sons and your wife and your sons' wives with you. You are to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male and female, to keep them alive with you. Two of every kind of bird, of every kind of animal and of every kind of creature that moves along the ground will come to you to be kept alive. You are to take every kind of food that is to be eaten and store it away as food for you and for them."
Noah did everything just as God commanded him.

And:
On that very day Noah and his sons, Shem, Ham and Japheth, together with his wife and the wives of his three sons, entered the ark. They had with them every wild animal according to its kind, all livestock according to their kinds, every creature that moves along the ground according to its kind and every bird according to its kind, everything with wings. Pairs of all creatures that have the breath of life in them came to Noah and entered the ark. The animals going in were male and female of every living thing, as God had commanded Noah. Then the Lord shut him in.
For forty days the flood kept coming on the earth, and as the waters increased they lifted the ark high above the earth. The waters rose and increased greatly on the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the water. They rose greatly on the earth, and all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered. The waters rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than twenty feet. Every living thing that moved on the earth perished-birds, livestock, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth, and all mankind. Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died. Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out; men and animals and the creatures that move along the ground and the birds of the air were wiped from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those with him in the ark.

The waters flooded the earth for a hundred and fifty days. [/b]

Does this story make sense? Did this really happen? Did 8 people really build an Ark that is 450 feet long and 75 feet wide? Did an omniscient God write this story, or did primitive cattle herders make it up out of thin air? Let's think it through using common sense and realise that these passages are make belief stories that have been embellished in the consciousness of man for a while but honestly its time to wake up from this slumber, Haba! I dont know how a rational human or christian would be able to honestly explain this biblical gaffe!

Good day
I speak to you with a burning passion,no matter the diverse religions,Christianity should not be mistaken as one of them.Apart from Christ there is no other way through which God can be reached.When adam fell in the garden through disobedience,He sold all the rights God gave him to the devil.From then on the devil molested humanity with sickness,death,failure,misfortune and sin.But Jesus came in the form of a man because blood must be shared for man to be redeemed.The devil has no blood,God has no blood cause He is a Spirit.Therefore He had to come down in the form of a man through a woman.

Where do you guys get such idiotic staements from and try to rationalise them? Sometimes i wonder if you guys actually read what you post especially when your quoting from the bible. You say apart from christ, there is no other way to reach god. Question mate:

1. Which christ?

2. Which god?

They are both imaginary things that can only be substantiated by a greatly deluded being. So how can i reach an imaginary thing through another imaginary thing Really makes no sense at all!

When adam fell in the garden through disobedience,He sold all the rights God gave him to the devil.

But i thought the bible professes that man was made in his own image (That is perfect) and god is all loving and forgiving but he couldnt forgive Adam for eating an apple , Some forgiving god my foot! I wonder what god would have done with adam if he had bestially slept with a female chimpanzee!

From then on the devil molested humanity with sickness,death,failure,misfortune and sin.

Pure Rubbish! It makes sense to you to say god is humble , peaceful and all loving and answers all your prayers and works wonders in your life but you conviently choose to ignore that the same all loving, kind, perfect god also kills people in their thousands, creates earthquakes, fires, floods and a lot of atrocities that would even make Hitler grin with jealousy. When its god, (Oh my god is great), when Katrina floods occur, you conviently turn a deaf and blind eye and chose to sub conciously ignore and blot that memory from your thoughts that your all perfect god had just killed over 200,000 for no just cause. Instead you chose to blame an imaginary devil as the cause of that earthquake or disease,

pffffsss

But Jesus came in the form of a man because blood must be shared for man to be redeemed.The devil has no blood,God has no blood cause He is a Spirit.Therefore He had to come down in the form of a man through a woman.

This comment is even more idiotic than the last one. Can you hear your self professing barbarism and cannibalism? "He came in form of a man because blood must be shed for man to be redeemed"

Now its time to analyse your delusions:

1. You said jesus came, ( Who has seen him?) am sure the next thing that comes to your mind to defend such absurdities is this passage:

1 Corinthians 15:3-6 provides a nice summary of those passages, as written by Paul:

For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me.

As you can see in this passage, Jesus appeared to hundreds of people a number of different times and paul was a major beneficiary of that mysterious appearance.

So, Why doesn't Jesus appear to everyone and prove that he is resurrected, just like he appeared to Paul? There is nothing to stop Jesus from materializing in your kitchen tonight to have a personal chat with you. And if you think about it, Jesus really does need to appear to each of us. If Paul needed a personal visit from Jesus to know that Jesus was resurrected, then why wouldn't you?

It is an important question for the following reasons:

We are told by the Bible that Jesus appeared to hundreds of people.

We know that it is OK for Jesus to appear to people -- it does not take away their free will, for example -- because it was OK for Jesus to appear to hundreds of other people.

We know that it would be easy for Jesus to appear to everyone all through history, since Jesus is all-powerful and timeless.

We know that, if Jesus did reappear to everyone, it would be incredibly helpful. We could all know, personally, that Jesus is resurrected and that Jesus is God. If Paul (and all the other people in the Bible) needed a personal visit to know that Jesus was resurrected, then why not you and me?

The reason why Jesus has appeared to no one for 2,000 years is because Jesus never appeared to anyone.
In other words, there is nothing stopping Jesus from appearing to you, and several good reasons for him to appear.

But i know if you say if we pray and have faith, jesus might appear to us or me:

What if we pray to jesus like this: "Dear jesus, please appear to us, as you did to Paul and the 500 brethren, so that we can see the evidence of your resurrection. In your name we pray, amen." Here is what Jesus has promised us in the Bible:

Matthew 7:7 Jesus says:

Ask, and it will be given you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. For every one who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened. Or what man of you, if his son asks him for bread, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a serpent? If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him!

In John chapter 14:14:
Whatever you ask in my name, I will do it, that the Father may be glorified in the Son; if you ask anything in my name, I will do it.

In Matthew 18:19:
Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

Jesus is actually in our midst. So he is right here already, supposedly. Yet when we pray to him to physically materialize, as he did to hundreds of others, nothing happens.

Isn't it odd that Nothing happens, given the fact that Jesus promises us that something will happen? Isn't it odd that nothing happens when, supposedly, Jesus is right here with us already, and materialization would be trivial for him?

Christians have created a situation where coincidence cannot "answer" the prayer. The only way for this prayer to be answered is for Jesus to actually, unambiguously, materialize. In this situation, we also know that it is trivial for Jesus to materialize, that there would be many benefits if Jesus did materialize, that Jesus has supposedly materialized to other human beings, and that Jesus has promised to answer our prayer that he materialize.

How do we explain the fact that this prayer goes unanswered, no matter who prays, despite Jesus' promise that he will answer our prayers?

As you think about this, you will realize that Paul's story in the Bible must be false. Simply look at Paul's story like any judge or Reasonable man in a courtroom would. What Paul's story in 1 Cor 15 is suggesting is entirely unprecedented - a man dead three days with mortal wounds came back to life. Yet there is no evidence that it is true, and there are many alternative explanations for what Paul is saying. Paul could be fabricating the story, Paul could have hallucinated or dreamed the meeting, Paul could have seen an imposter, etc. In addition, no one is seeing Jesus today, even though it would be trivial and obvious for Jesus to appear to people today just like he did with Paul.

Given this evidence, if this were any normal situation instead of a religious one, people would conclude that what Paul is saying is untrue. There is zero evidence to support Paul's story, zero reason to believe it, a motive to lie and plenty of alternative explanations. There is also the fact that much of the rest of the Bible contains provably false stories. Plus the fact that it would be trivial for Jesus to provide the evidence that Paul needs to confirm his story by reappearing on earth. Add to that the fact that Jesus has promised to answer our prayers but refuses to materialize when we pray to him. The only thing to do is to reject Paul's story. Every bit of evidence points to the fact that the resurrection story is a myth, nothing more.

What about Jesus' famous statement in the Bible, "Happy are those who have not seen yet still believe"? What you realize is that this statement creates the perfect cover for a scam.

Let's say you are Jesus, you are a normal human being, you realize that you are going to die and you want to cover for this fact. Here is what you would say: "Happy are those who have not seen yet still believe." What you are saying is, "I exist, and the way I am going to show you that I exist is by not showing that I exist." For every other object in the universe, the way that we know it exists is because the object provides evidence of its existence. If there is no evidence for an object's existence, we call it imaginary (e.g. Santa claus, Vampires,Leprechauns, Tooth fairies, Easter Bunny etc). But with Jesus, the lack of evidence is turned into evidence.

Quite clever, but obviously a scam.

If the resurrection were true, then Jesus would be answering prayers as he promises in the Bible. He would also appear when people pray to see him.


Anyway going back to your cannibalism before i was almost delusionally converted to believe that jesus exists:

You christians eloquently refer to this chapter of the bible especially during this easter period to justify your cannibalism:


Mark, Chapter 14:

And as they were eating, he took bread, and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to them, and said, "Take; this is my body." And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, and they all drank of it. And he said to them, "This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many.
There are a few lines in Luke chapter 22 that are nearly identical.

Jesus gets far more graphic, however, in John chapter 6:53-55:

So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.

To any normal person, this sounds very much like the script of a gruesome horror film. It sounds like some sort of revolting satanic ritual. It definitely does not sound like the words of the all-loving creator of the universe.
Imagine that you are a normal person, and you have never been exposed to Christianity before. Now imagine that a Christian comes up to you and quotes John 6:53. Any normal adult would rightfully assume the Christian to be insane. Thus, you never see a Car sticker that says "John 6:53."


However, the assumption is accurate. The dictionary describes cannibalism in the following way:

The usually ritualistic eating of human flesh by a human being

What Jesus is demanding is cannibalism

Christians need to ritualistically cannibalize Jesus' body, and drink his blood, to have "eternal life."

What does your common sense tell you about all of this? Look at it through the eyes of a child. What we are talking about here is cannibalism, and what Christians are doing looks exactly like a pagan/satanic ritual. If you are a Christian, the two questions you may be asking yourself right now are:

Why in the world am I, as a sane individual, participating in ritualistic cannibalism? How in the world did I stoop to this point?

Why would an all-powerful, all-loving God demand that I do this? What sort of God am I worshipping?

If you are curious, here is why Christianity contains this bizarre ritual. It is not the case that an all-powerful God in heaven demands this behavior. All of the rituals in Christianity are completely man-made. Christianity is a snow ball that rolled over a dozen pagan religions. As the snowball grew, it freely attached pagan rituals in order to be more palatable to converts e.g:


"The vestiges of pagan religion in Christian symbology are undeniable. Egyptian sun disks became the halos of Catholic saints. Pictograms of Isis nursing her miraculously conceived son Horus became the blueprint for our modern images of the Virgin Mary nursing Baby Jesus. And virtually all the elements of the Catholic ritual - the miter, the altar, the doxology, and communion, the act of "God-eating" - were taken directly from earlier pagan mystery religions."

"Nothing in Christianity is original. The pre-Christian God Mithras - called the Son of God and the Light of the World - was born on December 25, died, was buried in a rock tomb, and then resurrected in three days. By the way, December 25 is also the birthday or Osiris, Adonis, and Dionysus. The newborn Krishna was presented with gold, frankincense, and myrrh. Even Christianity's weekly holy day was stolen from the pagan"

So go back and ask your pastor or priest to really tell you were christianity came from and stop being so delusional about some jesus or god that just sprang up mysteriously from no where that has no iota of evidence to validate its existence.

I wont bother to punish myself by analysing your posts line by line anymore because it just smacks of sheer idiocy, lunacy and the height of irrationality coming from a person who seems to be educated by fails to actually read carefully, analyse what he has read and provide reasonable comments about it. While it seems quite normal to criticize and analyse any newspaper, article, novel or comment, it is a taboo to actually look at the bible constructively but to be so zombie like and accept everything in it as the work of god but not the work of primitive cattle rearers

Rubbish!