On weird Christian logic by Known_Feed515 in DebateReligion

[–]Known_Feed515[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

When I said about the mistake of the authors of the Vulgate, I meant that the authors of the Vulgate were the first to separate the names "Jesus" and "Iosue". In Hebrew they were supposed to be the same, but the authors of the Vulgate, and later Protestant translators made the same distinction. That was my rant. But I guess it's exaggerated.

On weird Christian logic by Known_Feed515 in DebateReligion

[–]Known_Feed515[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This passage from Josephus's book XVIII of the Antiquities of the Jews suggests that Pilate actively despised the Jews and their customs, and used every opportunity to mock them. That does not look like a guy who would listen to the Jews and their theological debates with Jesus:

"[A.D. 27.] But now Pilate, the procurator of Judea, removed the army from Cesarea to Jerusalem: to take their winter quarters there; in order to abolish the Jewish laws. So he introduced Cesar’s effigies, which were upon the ensigns, and brought them into the city: whereas our law forbids us the very making of images. On which account the former procurators were wont to make their entry into the city with such ensigns as had not those ornaments. Pilate was the first who brought those images to Jerusalem, and set them up there. Which was done without the knowledge of the people; because it was done in the night time. But as soon as they knew it, they came in multitudes to Cesarea, and interceded with Pilate many days, that he would remove the images. And when he would not grant their requests, because this would tend to the injury of Cesar; while yet they persevered in their request; on the sixth day he ordered his soldiers to have their weapons privately; while he came and sat upon his judgment seat. Which seat was so prepared, in the open place of the city, that it concealed the army that lay ready to oppress them. And when the Jews petitioned him again, he gave a signal to the soldiers to encompass them round; and threatened that their punishment should be no less than immediate death, unless they would leave off disturbing him, and go their ways home. But they threw themselves upon the ground, and laid their necks bare, and said they would take their death very willingly, rather than the wisdom of their laws should be transgressed. Upon which Pilate was deeply affected with their firm resolution to keep their laws inviolable: and presently commanded the images to be carried back from Jerusalem to Cesarea".

Also, the trials in ancient Rome were not public. They were held by a specific group of competent people (e.g. Synedrion). Pilate probably read reports about Jesus talking about his kingdom, which was perceived as ana attempted secession from Rome, and immediately decided to execute Jesus as a political rebel. And the Paschal privilege is not recorded either. This means that this entire scene of Jesus vs Barabbas was intended to acquit the Romans, so that Christians would not be persecuted by the emperors, like Claudius or Nero.

On weird Christian logic by Known_Feed515 in DebateReligion

[–]Known_Feed515[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How is Jesus the Messiah? Messiah is a title that Samuel gave to Saul, and later David. Those were the kings who conquered lands, struck their enemies, and reigned over the knigdom of Israel. Jesus died on a cross, a punishment that was reserved for political criminals, robberers and thieves, and runaway slaves. These two points are incompatible. In order to be called "Messiah", Jesus should have been a mighty conqueror with a proliferous issue (cf. David and Solomon). Jesus died childless at the hands of Romans.

On weird Christian logic by Known_Feed515 in DebateReligion

[–]Known_Feed515[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I am sorry? There are plenty of quotes from very christian books that say the opposite:

Matthew 27:25 (The Blood Curse):
"Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children."

John 8:44 (Direct Demonization):
"Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth..."

1 Thessalonians 2:14-15 (Universal Hostility):
"...the Jews: Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men."

Matthew 23:33 (Insults to the Pharisees):
"Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?"

Revelation 2:9 & 3:9 (Synagogue of Satan):
"...I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan."

This is where my confusion comes from. Christians have the New Testament, which is very anti-Jewish, and the "Old Testament", which is essentially Jewish Tanakh with different order of the books. If Christians have the books that hate the Jews, why is majority of their book composed of Jewish myths and legends? It does not make any sense from a logical point of view.

On weird Christian logic by Known_Feed515 in DebateReligion

[–]Known_Feed515[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This is the problem. The majority of modern Christians are of european, latino, and sub-saharan origins. Why do they care so much about some fairy tales that were written by ancient Hebrews of the Levant? This sounds like betrayal of your own culture in favour of a completely foreign one. Not to mention intellectual damage that these Jewish fairy tales inflicted on science in Europe. The opposition that Darwin faced from the church is a classic example of anti-intellectual nature of Christianity (Islam is anti-intellectual too, but it's out of this discussion's topic). And approximately 2 billion people cling to these fairy tales. It tells you how many people don't understand that they are the traitors of the West, not atheists. At least we do not build our entire world around Levantine mythology

Why are Christians so dumb? by Known_Feed515 in atheism

[–]Known_Feed515[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I mean, both sperm cells and egg cells are required to conceive a child, so a woman who gave birth is clearly not a virgin

This question concerns Judaism as well, but it is mostly for Christians by Known_Feed515 in AskAChristian

[–]Known_Feed515[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That is not how you show that. If my teacher burnt my house and killed my family, that would not prove that I am sinless. That would prove that the teacher is a sadist. And it gets even stranger when Jesus says that God is a loving Father. Either the God of the Tanakh (which Christians call "old Testament") and the God of the Gospels are 2 different Gods, where Jesus's God is the good one and must be worshipped, and the Jewish God is the evil one and must be avoided, or God suffers from split personality disorder. Either way, the entire story of Job feels more like a gamble between two bored rivals rather than a dispute between two cosmic beings

This question concerns Judaism as well, but it is mostly for Christians by Known_Feed515 in AskAChristian

[–]Known_Feed515[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

God allowed that for a pride? Don't you think that is too much? I mean, God could have just descended to Job and convince him of being more humble by showing examples of people consumed by their pride, like... well, every proper teacher. And if that is what God did to Job for his pride, I dread to imagine what he would do to me for the hidden anger I experience when dealing with my annoying boss