I Have Something to Say

I wish christians would learn the difference between evidence and propaganda. They claim they have solid evidence of their god but, when asked to produce it, they just spew out more propaganda.

They also seem to think self verification is valid - "the bible must be true because it says it is" - or employ circular logic - "god exists because the bible says so; the bible is god's word so must be true".

Some of us can see through all the deception but they also target impressionable young children. That is really beyond the pale.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

frequentlyme · 70-79, M

And the bible was written by man, which makes it, as much as anything, a book filled with nothing but the perceptions of man. Perceptions are not necessarily fact. In my view (perception), the bible was written by a number of men who had like perceptions, perceptions they wanted the masses to believe in, thereby gaining control of the masses. Yah, not fact, but fiction.

penguinswon · M

@frequentlyme a pretty elaborate scam if you ask me

frequentlyme · 70-79, M

@penguinswon Exactly!

Zeusdelight · 61-69, M

@frequentlyme given that the “authors” of the New Testament were all out to death for their beliefs, I’m not sure control or popularity was their aim.

suzie1960 · 61-69, F

@Zeusdelight Lots of terrorists die fighting their cause. They were merely unsuccessful in achieving their aims of control at the time.

Zeusdelight · 61-69, M

They had no arms when they were killed. They had no aims for control. That was not their message or their point.

suzie1960 · 61-69, F

@Zeusdelight How can you be sure they had no aims for control? I believe their intention was to take control by covert means. They failed at the time but the next wave was more successful.

Zeusdelight · 61-69, M

Because they were poor people in a poor area of a world 2000 years ago. They lived under occupation by the Roman Empire. None of them were soldiers and none of them were interested in that type of political power. Their concept of power revolves around love, which no-one else saw as a power base.

suzie1960 · 61-69, F

@Zeusdelight I don't agree that means they weren't seeking to take power, if anything it's evidence they were attempting to overthrow the occupying forces. It seems to me gaining control and popularity was very much one of their aims.

Zeusdelight · 61-69, M

That’s like saying that the homeless in the US are just about to take it over. The Church has such a large power base that they hid from persecution for close to 300 years. They were more interested in survival rather than anything else.

suzie1960 · 61-69, F

@Zeusdelight That's a flawed analogy. The homeless are just trying to survive.

The christian church did manage to seize control eventually. It's only now losing its grip on society.

Zeusdelight · 61-69, M

Sorry, have you read what I said happened for the first 300 years. They were struggling to survive too. They were the poorest of the poor in an occupied land. The difference between them and today’s homeless is that the Government was officially trying to kill the early Christians.

suzie1960 · 61-69, F

@Zeusdelight Of course they were undercover at first, they wouldn't have lasted long if they had been open about trying to take over. As you said, those who were caught were executed.

The Government of the time saw the christians as a terrorist threat so tried to neutralize that threat. It's no different today really. You must have heard of Guantanamo Bay. The Government might not officially be trying to kill off the homeless but it doesn't do much to help them survive.

Zeusdelight · 61-69, M

Look, if you are really interested in reading the history and getting a sense of the time then rather than transferring current day cocepts back to there, there are wonderful non-religious based resources available. Thanks for the chat.

suzie1960 · 61-69, F

@Zeusdelight plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

Thank you.

Zeusdelight · 61-69, M

True, to an extent. @suzie1960