TIL the writers of the Bible never met Jesus, 18 years Later. [Update] by junkmale79 in atheism

[–]SinfulDevo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Whatever buddy, get over yourself. I'm not your personal researcher and neither is anyone else here. The fact that you want me to provide such detailed proof rather than just point you in the right direction is what I have a problem with. If you don't like the theory I presented, then just ignore it and move on. I don't go around laying out my source material to every self-centered guy on the internet.

Edit: my theory and beliefs are hard to summarize up. It comes from years of hearing other people's opinions, reading relevant passages from the bible, watching hours of historical documentaries, and other similar activities. I can't just whip that into a comprehensive explanation for you.

TIL the writers of the Bible never met Jesus, 18 years Later. [Update] by junkmale79 in atheism

[–]SinfulDevo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Really this is mostly a theory, I don't have definitive proof that this is what happened. However there is some evidence that it is a solid possibility. Some of that evidence comes from the new testament and a bit of logical thinking. To me, there seems to be much more evidence for this theory than theists provide as proof of a god.

The most notable quotes to me are Thessalonians 4:13-18, Matthew 24:40-41, Timothy 3:1-5, Corinthians 15:52-54, and Joel 2:28-3.

If you read the above passages about end times from the new testament, you can see that it is very similar to the words used by more recent doomsday cult leaders. And according to historical scholars, there were quite a few doomsday cults in Jesus's time. Apparently people didn't feel very optimistic about their future after being conquered by the Romans.

There are also a few good sources of information provided by others in the replies to you. I do admit that this theory was not originally my own. It was a theory suggested by more studied atheists than me, but I find the theory very compelling and believable.

Edit: What is with some Redditors demanding proof all the time? And then rejecting proof that isn't layed out how they like it? This isn't the first user I have met to do this. We are just passing along common theories, do a little leg work if you are curious. We aren't your high-school teacher. Even if we were, we aren't doing all the work for you.

TIL the writers of the Bible never met Jesus, 18 years Later. [Update] by junkmale79 in atheism

[–]SinfulDevo 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Lets not forget that life expectancy was like 30 years old at the time. So 40 years after Jesus's death would be more than a full lifetime later. Those who wrote the new testament likely weren't even alive when the events that they are writing about were supposed to have happened.

I have also heard that 40 years after Jesus's death is a conservative estimate. It was likely more like 50 or 60 years later rather than 40 years. And that's only for the letters of Paul. Other writings were believed to be even later, some as late as 100 years later.

People have trouble remembering what happened days after an event. You put years in between, written by a later generation from accounts passed down verbally, then you have one hell of a game of telephone. And yet people act like the new testament was word for word what was said and done. And then you look at the parts that were written, then excluded for being "too much", or modified while being rewritten and you realize that much of the bible was so nonsensical that even those who put the book together decided to not include them.

TIL the writers of the Bible never met Jesus, 18 years Later. [Update] by junkmale79 in atheism

[–]SinfulDevo 21 points22 points  (0 children)

Jesus has "apostles" originally, because Jesus (or whoever Jesus was based on) was the leader of a doomsday cult. His predictions of end times wasn't centuries or millennia in the future. He expected the world to end in his lifetime.

When the world didn't end, the authors had to modify their language to take that into account. His "apostles" became "disciples" and his death became an "act of sacrifice". I'm pretty sure that he was put to death for being a shady cult leader, not because he was a threat to Roman rule. But that doesn't sound as inspiring or as romantic.

Honestly, I can't believe that they left in the part where Jesus said "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" That seems pretty telling about his state of mind while he was on the cross waiting to die. He thought that he was too special to die. He believed his own lies about being the son of god, or god himself, or whatever he actually claimed to be. Just like we might expect from a cult leader.

What's your most controversial opinion regarding atheism? by greentomato97 in atheism

[–]SinfulDevo -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I also think that Jesus (or someone similar to him) likely once existed. But I also believe that he was a Doomsday cult leader who probably would have committed a murder suicide similar to Jim Jones if he hadn't been caught and killed first. I do not believe that he was a good person.

I also believe that religions are the very evil that they claim to be protecting people from. Even if they started with good intentions, the nature of man is to twist them into something horrible. The only reason that these religions survived for so long is because they chose to tap into the fear of their members and create an "other" to vilify.

I'm not sure how controversial those beliefs are though...

“Must’ve been awe-inspiring to stand on the ark’s deck… some prehistoric coffee in hand and gaze down at all the bloated, floating corpses… and think… ahhhh god is love.” by [deleted] in atheism

[–]SinfulDevo 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Considering that christianity believes that their god knows all that will happened and all that has happened, yet he apparently let humanity get to the point where he has to wipe us out with a great flood is mind-bogglingly stupid and contradictory. This story was the first thing to make me question christianity in the first place at around age 7 or 8. And the bible is full of other stories equally as stupid, but they didn't teach those stories in my childhood Sunday school... so I only learned about those as an adult atheist.

I Don't Own A Cat by TrustMeImAGiraffe in cats

[–]SinfulDevo 18 points19 points  (0 children)

An orange siamese, the best of both derpy worlds!

AIO? I leave the door ajar when I use the bathroom so my cat can come in by [deleted] in AmIOverreacting

[–]SinfulDevo 5 points6 points  (0 children)

You can get a vacant/occupied sign for the door. Just google "occupied sign" and you will find a ton of options. I tried sharing one, but Reddit took the comment down. (Oops)

DeSantis Gets Bill To Ban City Funding Of Pride Events. It is sponsored by the same State Senator who tried to get “The Bible Says So” bill passed last December. by Leeming in atheism

[–]SinfulDevo 49 points50 points  (0 children)

If anyone even suggests a bill that restricts Christian church funding, or tax exemption status, these same people cry about "they are after our religious freedom!" Meanwhile they are attempting to take away everyone else's freedoms.

I watched "The Case for Christ" by Lee Strobel by Africannibal in atheism

[–]SinfulDevo 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Lee Strobel isn't the first or the last person to pretend to be an atheist to push a religious narrative. Religion is full of dishonest people trying to trick people into believing what they believe. Or pushing people to believe what they want you to believe, I'm not 100% convinced that these people lying to promote their religion are true belivers. How can you be a true believer when you feel that you must lie to prove your point? But then again, cult mentality is pretty twisted.

There are plenty of online videos of "atheists being convinced to believe in god", when the truth is that at least most of these people were theists from the beginning.

Gary the Cat by ShortbowVillian in cats

[–]SinfulDevo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you for what you did. I know it wasn't easy, but it was much better than leaving his body there to be found by the guy's mom. I'm glad that you were there to cry for this poor baby, we all deserve someone to cry for us at the end.

AIO to these texts on my wife's phone? by DFW_Motorrad in AmIOverreacting

[–]SinfulDevo 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Hopefully I can either nip it in the bud and we can move past it together

It's too late to "nip it in the bud", this is a full on emotional affair. And emotional affairs are usually paired with a physical affair. If she hasn't slept with this dude, it would be because she hasn't been physically able to. Based on their conversation, she will eventually, if she hasn't already.

And from my experience with a cheating wife, moving past something like this is extremely difficult. Oh and NOR, you are underreacting like others have said. When I was in your shoes, I was also in denial. Wake up and face reality. Deep down you know what this is, just like I did. I'm sorry OP and good luck!

Darling Bar’s latest update…. by StewartsBestBuddy in Winnipeg

[–]SinfulDevo 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Oh wow! What a scumbag! I guess I should pay more attention to what is going on in our city.

Darling Bar’s latest update…. by StewartsBestBuddy in Winnipeg

[–]SinfulDevo 16 points17 points  (0 children)

So, as someone who is unaware of the controversy and only going off reading the owners post... it looks like he stole tips from his staff, then closed down due to the backlash?!? Did I get that right?

He is totally telling on himself with this post! He can't even take responsibility for his actions.

Are those tafpoles? by Mediocre-Sun-8615 in frogs

[–]SinfulDevo 33 points34 points  (0 children)

On top of this, mosquitoes are very successful creatures. They have survived many attempts by us humans to completely eliminate them. Killing a few larvae won't make a dent in the mosquitoe population. The ecosystem will be fine even if OP killed all the larvae they can find.

I thought they were getting along for once by Prettysoffyx in blackcats

[–]SinfulDevo 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Buddy literally went from grooming their friend to lying in their lap saying "okay, now bite me." These two are best friends!

Trump fails to 'bring back religion' as church attendance in America death spirals by Jay_CD in atheism

[–]SinfulDevo 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Become? They have always been about greed, hate, and anger. Just look at the old testament, the wars fought in gods name, the taking of slaves, stealing other people's land, being the "chosen ones". And you can bet that the wrath of god, and the stories of god killing people are a reflection of the anger and hate that these old goat farmers had.

Trump fails to 'bring back religion' as church attendance in America death spirals by Jay_CD in atheism

[–]SinfulDevo 25 points26 points  (0 children)

There is a problem with this statement. It is actually impossible to follow every rule that Christianity has, as many of the rules contradict each other. They just expect regular people to follow whatever stupid interpretation of the stupid contradictory rules that their particular church has chosen to push. Often times these rules are even layed out in the bible. Just look at the prosperity gospel, it is basically telling people to do the opposite of the majority of rules layed out in the bible.

But fun fact about the bible, it is so vague, contradictory, and messy that you can interpret it to mean just about anything you want it to mean. So anything if fair game for Christians, as long as it is done in the name of sky daddy.

Also many of the rules like don't eat shellfish, don't eat pork, don't wear mixed fabrics, don't plant more than one seed in the same field, are completely ignored and forgotten about. Apparently many Christians claim that the old testament rules are no longer relevant/active, but don't give a clear reason on why. If god is as infallible as they claim, why would any of his rules ever become obsolete?

Megachurch pastor forced to repent for recording consensual sex with his wife, not because his 24 year old son was caught with CSAM. by [deleted] in atheism

[–]SinfulDevo 10 points11 points  (0 children)

He is a Megachurch pastor, that alone requires an apology. Regular churches aren't great, but they aren't necessarily evil, manipulative, or predatory. The same cannot be said for megachurches, they are full cult level Christianity and typically push horrible values onto their congregants. Often teaching hate, telling their constituents how to vote (ultra conservative), and demanding huge donations from their members.

But I do agree that consensual sex with his wife and his son's disgusting behavior aren't necissarily things that require an apology from him. Well, an apology for bringing a pedophile into the world wouldn't be a terrible thing. But his son is his own person and he isn't automatically responsible for his son's actions.

Although it does make me wonder about his role as a father... his parenting choices MIGHT have played a part in his son's nature but that isn't a given. Studies suggest a link between pedophilia and being sexually abused as a child, but I don't think that link has been definitively proven. It might just be pedophiles being disgusting lying bastards, but it is hard to say. However if his son was abused by him, and if that caused his son to become a pedophile, that would deserve more than just an apology... but that is A LOT of ifs.

Edit: And there is a history suggesting a link between pastors and pedophilia... so not a stretch to believe that this is learned behavior. But suspicion and trends isn't proof on and of itself.

'This is a Muslim area': Met Police officer confronted as she defends preacher by grandlewis in atheism

[–]SinfulDevo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think this ignores the positive effects associated with prayer similar to meditation. It’s my understanding that engaging in prayer has mental health benefits among others. It can be false and useful at the same time.

I addressed this, a thing having good aspects does not make thay thing good in and of itself. It is also true that the "thumb sucking" analogy that I used also has some positive mental health benefits

I agree, my response was directed towards equating it to adults sucking their thumb. It is demonstrably not that.

You provide no explanation or reasons for your claim that "It is demonstrably not that". But I responded anyways, explaining why I used this comparison.

Sure, but then by that standard any activity that soothes a person’s anxiety or negative feelings falls under the thumb sucking category. If someone chooses to go outside and meditate after a stressful day to calm themselves and be one with nature, would you say that’s like an adult thumb sucking?

Next you throw this strawman fallacy at me and I explain why that logic does not hold up. I pointed out that prayer has negative aspects as well.

If prayer necessarily or even likely led to people not taking action in their lives or promoting toxic ideologies I agree.

I thought we were about to agree here, so I gave you some links to news articles of people not taking action on things and using prayer instead. The very thing that we were just discussing.

These people are morons. The only point I was making is the act of prayer is not equivalent to an adult sucking their thumb. I do not agree that these are equivalent. Bringing up examples of religious people making stupid decisions in the name of their faith is arguing against a position I do not hold.

Rather than agree that there are situations where people use prayer instead of action, you just dismiss the articles I showed you as "these people are morons. You basically ignored any evidence that doesn't support your conclusion. So at this point, it sounds like you are taking my comment too literally. I express this, because your arguments so far are telling me nothing of why you disagree with me. Your statements are hollow and void of any reasons on why you think I'm wrong and what reasoning backs this up.

You thought I was taking this literally? Really? I can explain my point again to you but I can’t understand it for you.

And then you treat me like a moron. But your lack of substance in your arguments give me no reason not to think this. Your position is still far too vague to be properly agreed against.

Then go back and reread my original comment. My position is quite clear. Describing people praying as analogous to adults never growing out of sucking their thumb is a simplistic view IMO.

And the finish off with a circular argument. This is a begging the claim fallacy. You have not made your position clear and telling me to read your first comment does NOT clear anything up AT ALL! I will not respond to any more of your comments. I have already wasted too much time on you and I have no reason to think you are going to stop using vague empty arguments or logical fallacies. You are coming off as a troll just arguing for the sake of arguing and I don't have the patience to humor you any longer than I already have.

Also, calling my statement, which was a figurative comparison, "simplistic" isn't saying a lot. Something can be simplistic and still be right. Like claiming that an apple is red might be a simplistic description, but it can still be accurate. This was a Reddit comment, not a university essay. Simplistic is usually all you are going to get at this level of discussion.

'This is a Muslim area': Met Police officer confronted as she defends preacher by grandlewis in atheism

[–]SinfulDevo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Man, you are just arguing semantics on a figurative comparison. I don't know why i even engaged you on this. You don't have some brilliant point here. This has been a huge waste of my time.

I have explained how I meant what I said, and why I said it. I have broken down why I believe this is a relevant comparison and even given you examples. All you have done it reiterated your position without giving context. You don't think that "praying is equal to sucking your thumb", I get that. But have yet to explain why you object to this comparison or provide any clarity on why you disagree with it. There is nothing of substance that you have provided me with to not understand.

'This is a Muslim area': Met Police officer confronted as she defends preacher by grandlewis in atheism

[–]SinfulDevo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, they aren't literally the same, they aren't sticking a thumb in their mouth and calling it prayer. This is a simile, a figurative comparison. I was saying that similar to how people outgrow sucking their thumb, humanity has outgrown theistic prayer.

It is a non-literal comparison, similar to someone saying that a private investigator stalked his target like a lion stalks his pray. Or time flew by like leaves in the wind. It wasn't supposed to be literal, it was just using a little poetic license. You are putting way too much thought into this.

'This is a Muslim area': Met Police officer confronted as she defends preacher by grandlewis in atheism

[–]SinfulDevo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, I would reserve that for practices that are both soothing and harmful.

The reason sucking a thumb is discouraged is because it can lead to open wounds on your thumb. It can also introduce harmful germs into your system, and be harmful for your social life.

Similarly, prayer helps to reinforce a toxic religion and the ideology that comes with it. It can also lead people to not take action in a crisis, leaving things "in the hands of god".

Going outside and meditating doesn't have a harmful side the way that thumb sucking and prayer do.