Maybe it’s just human nature for believers to claim that their so-called holy books are advance. That’s natural and I can live with that. I really don’t care if you are just defending your religious belief; well it’s just belief anyway. The problem is when they claim that certain facts prove that...Hmmmmm, I think you get the picture.

 

Here’s an example. Eliseo (you know him?) wrote this article to prove that the Bible is an advance book. According to him, “The Bible is the one and only book on earth that carries with it an authority and authentication not coming from any human person, but from somebody whose knowledge is above nature and humans. This person is God. I will ask you some questions and try to answer them carefully and honestly.”

 

And so he answered it...but I doubt if it’s carefully and honestly.

 

Claim No.1 Advance in astronomy and earth science.

 

This belief that the earth is flat was shared even by powerful people up to the middle ages. It was only very recently that we have had physical evidences showing the picture of the earth caught from outer space by the cameras of the series of Apollo spaceships that were sent to the moon that proves that the earth is round and spherical in shape. This truth is already revealed in the Bible, less than 3000 years before it was seen by man. In the book of Isaiah 40:22 it says…

“It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in…”

And again…

(Amos 9:6) “The One who builds His upper chambers in the heavens And has founded His vaulted dome over the earth, He who calls for the waters of the sea And pours them out on the face of the earth, The LORD is His name.” (NASB)

 

These informations are present in the Bible long before man has seen physical evidences with his eyes that the earth is round. This truth can not come from any human source, but from Somebody dictating to prophet Isaiah what to write. Just like the prophet Daniel, Isaiah may not know or have any idea of the physical reality of the truth he is writing, but it was written for us to realize that wisdom in the Bible came from a Supernatural Being.

 

This belief that the earth is flat was shared even by powerful people up to the middle ages. It was only very recently that we have had physical evidences showing the picture of the earth caught from outer space by the cameras of the series of Apollo spaceships that were sent to the moon that proves that the earth is round and spherical in shape. This truth is already revealed in the Bible, less than 3000 years before it was seen by man.

 

The problem of this claim: In discussing the spherical era of Earth's history, the Encyclopedia Britannica (Vol. 6, 1978, pp. 1-3) explains that ancient astronomers determined that the earth was round by observing its circular shadow move across the moon during lunar eclipses. The Egyptians and Greeks as far back as 2550 BCE (more than a thousand years before Moses) knew not only the earth's spherical shape but also its approximate size. The Grecian philosopher Pythagoras, who was born in 532 BCE, defended the spherical theory on the basis of observations he had made of the shape of the sun and moon. If this information was generally known by educated Greeks and Egyptians before and during biblical times, how can anyone say with certitude that the writers of the Book of Isaiah couldn't have known about it?

 

So Eliseo’s claim is imaginary. Humans already know that before the Bible mentioned it on its pages.

 

Also, let’s take a good look at Isaiah 40:22. According to Eliseo, the word “the circle of the earth” confirms the scientific foreknowledge of the Bible and...What? Wait a minute...I thought he’ll answer this carefully and honestly?

 

Let’s look at Isaiah 40:22
²² It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:

 

Have you noticed that this verse compared “the circle of the earth” to a tent and not a ball? Maybe you’re familiar with a tent. Isn't it nice to know that the heavens are spread out like a tent? All the tents I have seen were domed over a flat surface.  In Hebrew, the word used for “circle” is “khug”, and just think for once, a plate is also a circle, a coin is also a circle, yet they are not spheres.

 

I would like to thank Eliseo’s own article from providing us more information. This piece of article can be found on his own post...and according to him, it came from Reader’s Digest Library of Modern Knowledge book 1 p.14 which says, “The Mediterranean and Middle Eastern people of the first millennium B.C. pictured the Earth as a flat slab of land, which was rectangular or circular in shape and rimmed by sea, and which at some point met the sky. What happened on this horizon no one knew; the fear of reaching the edge of the world discouraged mariners from sailing far from coasts they knew.”

 

The article speaks about the Mediterranean and Middle Eastern people of the first millennium B.C. That includes the ancient Hebrews. According to Isaiah 40:22 the Earth is like a dome where God sit upon it. The Hebrews copied this “cosmology” from more ancient Mediterranean and Middle Eastern civilization like Sumeria.

 

When the authors of Isaiah attempted to talk about Earth Science, their only source of knowledge was a chain of written history dating back to the Sumerian Civilization. The Sumerians were the first to invent writing—cuneiform—approximately 4000 BC or shortly thereafter.

 

The verse from Amos validated my claim.

 

(Amos 9:6) “The One who builds His upper chambers in the heavens And has founded His vaulted dome over the earth, He who calls for the waters of the sea And pours them out on the face of the earth, The LORD is His name.”

 

Notice the word “vaulted dome”?

 

Claim No. 2 That the Bible has already prophesized that human knowledge will increase.

(Daniel 12:8-10, 4) “And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things? And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand…

“…But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.”

The prophet Daniel wrote these passages, but do not have the slightest idea of what a cell phone, a television, or a computer would look like when the fulfillment of the words “Many shall run to and fro and knowledge shall be increased…” come into reality. This further proves that there was Someone who has the capacity to see what will happen in the future, dictated Daniel what to write in his book of the Bible. There is no possibility whatsoever that these advance information, which the Bible calls ‘prophecies’, can come from human mind, but from Someone far more superior in humans in understanding and wisdom.

The Bible is the only book on earth that tells us things that will happen before they happen, many centuries ahead.

The problem of this claim:  I really don’t get this one. It seems that Eliseo is implying that in the time of the ancients, there were no increased of knowledge, that the world was filled with primitives, heathens, savages, dummies. Their intelligence matched their simple technologies; their languages were simple, their cultures were primitive, they were brutes. So do other ancient culture’s heads empty? It looks as if the idea that someday knowledge will increase were not dreamed by other culture.

 

To say that only the Bible has prophesied the increased of knowledge in the future is badly flawed. More ancient religions and sacred writing have already done that even before the Hebrews walk out of Egypt. Whether it is bad or good other ancient cultures have predicted the boosted of knowledge.  Here are some examples: 

 

The Hindu epic poem, Mahabharata, written between 300 BCE and 300 CE described what appears to be nuclear and also describe the effects of radioactive poisoning.

It states: "… a single projectile charged with all the power of the universe. An incandescent column of smoke and fire, as brilliant as ten thousand suns, rose in all its splendor. It was the unknown weapon, the iron thunderbolt, a gigantic messenger of death which reduced to ashes the entire race of Vrishnis and Andhakas.

The corpses were so burnt they were no longer recognizable. Hair and nails fell out. Pottery broke without cause... Foodstuffs were poisoned. To escape, the warriors threw themselves in streams to wash themselves and their equipment.

The poem goes on to describe the devastation of this weapon which is similar to the destruction of the A-bomb. "A substance like fire has sprung into existence…blistering hills. Rivers, and trees. All… are being reduced to ashes."

Not only the Hindus but also the American Indian Hopi tribe has foreseen that men will invent a thermonuclear device. "The white brother will bring the symbol of the sun which makes a great explosion shaking the earth…

One of the most astounding prophecies of the American Indians, especially by the Hopi and the Aztec, was the coming of the white man, called Pahána, to the New World.

The Hopi said the white men would return with the sign of the cross and bring a holocaust upon the land through his inventions and lack of spirituality. Remember, the American Indians had no knowledge of Christianity.

As the American Indians prophesied, the new inhabitants of the land were great inventors. Ironically, many people from all different cultures prophesied of these new inventions before their times. This is in light of the fact that most people only knew of transportation by horses, asses, and boats.

 (Source: Hogue, John The Millennium Book of Prophecy © 1994 Harper-Collins)

Oh and one more thing, the ancients are really not that naive as Eliseo think they are. Have you ever read the works Zechariah Sitchin’s The 12^th Planet and Erich von Däniken’s Chariot of the Gods? You will notice that these books promote the advancements of science and technology from ancient culture such as Sumeria, Egypt, Babylonia and Mayan.

In 3100 BCE Menes, the founder of the 1st Dynasty writes The Secret Book of the Heart, describing 3 kinds of healers, the physician, the priest and the sorcerer. He already knew the role of the physician in healing ailments.

The Sumerians have invented the cylinder seal, the forerunner of the modern rotary press, the ziggurat, the kilt among others, all in the time of 3500 BCE.

In the Papyrus Ebers, the Ancient Egyptians were discovering things about how the human body worked and they knew that the heart, pulse rates, blood and air were important to the workings of the human body, "46 vessels go from the heart to every limb, if a doctor places his hand or fingers on the back of the head, hands, stomach, arms or feet then he hears the heart. The heart speaks out of every limb."

The papyrus continues:

"There are 4 vessels to his nostrils, 2 give mucus and 2 give blood; there are 4 vessels in his forehead; there are 6 vessels that lead to the arms; there are 6 vessels that lead to the feet; there are 2 vessels to his testicles (and) it is they which give semen; there are 2 vessels to the buttocks."

The document actually gives names to organs such as the spleen, the heart, the anus, the lungs etc so they must have known that these exist. One papyrus, the Edwin Smith Papyrus, has a detailed description of the brain in it so this organ was also well researched by the standards of the time. It is probable that this knowledge came as a result of the practice the Ancient Egyptians had of embalming dead bodies.

Claim No. 3 That only the Bible told us that it is good to cry and laughter is the best medicine.

 

Not only science, but also medical knowledge that man have learned very lately, and history, can attest to the authenticity of this one and only book.

The Bible tells us that it is good to cry.

(Ecclesiastes 7:2) “It is better to go to the house of mourning, than to go to the house of feasting: for that is the end of all men; and the living will lay it to his heart.”

(James 4:9) “Be afflicted, and mourn, and weep: let your laughter be turned to mourning, and your joy to heaviness.”

Medical findings have proven that what the Bible says is true.

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/health_medical/article24374 69.ece

Equally true is: We must not indulge in too much weariness and crying.

(1 Corinthians 7: 29-30) “But this I say, brethren, the time is short: it remaineth, that both they that have wives be as though they had none; And they that weep, as though they wept not; and they that rejoice, as though they rejoiced not; and they that buy, as though they possessed not…”

This will mean that we have to laugh also and be merry.

(Proverbs 17:22) “A merry heart doeth good like a medicine: but a broken spirit drieth the bones.”

There is no contradiction in the preceding verses that I have cited. We have to laugh. We have to cry. It depends upon the situation. It is natural. It is healthy. So, the Bible speaks the truth! Why the Bible? Think it over and over again.

 

The problem of this claim: Throughout history, spiritual traditions in China, Japan and India have revered the sacred strength of laughter. Lao-Tzu is always pictured smiling. Samurai are always laughing. “Laughter Yoga” was a practice of the ancient rishis of India over 5,000 years ago.

Hypocrites, in his medical treatise, stressed the importance of “a gay and cheerful mood on the part of the physician and patient fighting disease”.

In the Native American culture for example, “Nanabush” the trickster, a central figure in Chippewa (Ojibwa) storytelling, challenges the gods and cheats death by playing a trick on them: “During the year of the sickness, when I was the last one left, I saved myself by starting a story. Death could not get a word in edgewise, grew discouraged, and traveled on”. Nanapush demonstrates the power of Native American humor against sickness and death.

The ancient Hawaiians assert there are two chemical reactions within the human body that can accomplish Reconnection with Source Oneness. The first is the "sacred tear” beneath our sadness and hopelessness. Beneath that tear lies the second chemical reaction, said to be more powerful than all the healing agents known to humankind. It comes "out of the blue" with the power of a jackhammer, shattering the seriousness of the entire human estate. A power instantly freeing and balancing to all the body's chemistry. This is the power of laughter. When it comes in this manner, it comes through the "na'au" (gut level) and will pierce the hopelessness of any situation or attitude. It is not a power to be taken lightly, for the ancient Hawaiians say it holds the chemistry of immortality and will instantly heal any terminal disease. It’s said to be the "laughter of God" which shatters the ridiculousness of hopelessness.

Claim No. 4 Historical claims

 

History and archeology also proves the authenticity of the Bible. Findings in archeology have proven so many times that what is recorded in the Bible are actual facts and truth. Roman coins found in Samaria authenticates the records in Matthew 22:17-21.

 

“And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription? They say unto him, Caesar’s. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s.”

 

The discovery of the tunnel built by King Hezekiah authenticates the passages written in the book of Kings.

 

(2 Kings 20:20) “And the rest of the acts of Hezekiah, and all his might, and how he made a pool, and a conduit, and brought water into the city, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah?

 

The discovery of a limestone with the inscription that bares the name of Pontius Pilate is another proof of the Bible’s authenticity.

 

(John 19:6) “When the chief priests therefore and officers saw him, they cried out, saying, Crucify him, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Take ye him, and crucify him: for I find no fault in him.”?

 

The problem of this claim: The claim is really non-sequitur. Eliseo is making a conclusion that since these structures and personality exists, that means the Bible history is authentic. Have you heard of a historical fiction? While there are some historical facts in the Bible, it represents a gross misrepresentation of the current state of archaeology to say that it has “never” contradicted the Bible. For example, archaeological research has demonstrated that the city of Ai, reported in Josh. 8 to have been conquered by Joshua, was a heap of ruins centuries before Joshua's time as discovered by Kathleen Kenyon.

 

Bear in mind that the Bible, as we know it today, is the end product of a long process of writing, editing and selecting of literature primarily concerned with the saga explaining how the nation Israel came to be, the development of the Jewish religious concepts, and its long literary history. It cannot be assumed that a group of men composed writings echoing what they thought God was dictating. The Bible reflects historical situations, human events, men's reactions to these happenings, and the belief that God was also involved in events.

 

The problem here is how you can distinguish history from legend. Sure England exists, but can you prove that King Arthur also exists. Montalban, Rizal and Mount Makiling are real places, but are Bernardo Carpio and Mariang Makiling also real people?

 

The story of Jose Rizal is a good example. If you’re familiar with your Rizaliana, you may find the story of Rizal throwing his slippers in Pasig, River as a legend, yet the whole Rizal story is factual and supported by documents. How about the story that George Washington chopped a cherry tree? Do you think historians already know that George Washington will become the first president of the United State of America and were already ready to record his biography when he was still a toddler?

 

One characteristic that helps to distinguish legend from history is the tendency of those who record legend to use terms to indicate the great age of the account without being specific as to when, precisely, the event occurred just like the samples above.

 

Another distinguishing feature lies in the tendency of historical writings to deal with matters of public importance, events that affect the political and public welfare of the group. In legend, the account centers on a person who may embody or dramatize the spirit of the group for whom the tale is recounted.

 

Example, although much of I and II Kings are historical, The dates of composition of these books are unknown, but although there are variants as to the actual number of editions the books went through, the consensus is that the language and outlook seems to point to a post exilic period (after 586 BCE) of composition. Saying that these books may contain some historical facts should in no way be confused with the claim that these books are accurate, or true, in all aspects. The same explanation can also be used in Matthew 22:17-21. If Pontius Pilate is an existing “Perfect of Judea" (not a “procurator” as Eliseo and Tacitus believed) in the suppose time of Jesus, the events narrated in Matthew 27:51-53 is too far-fetched to be considered as a historical event.

 

Remember, archaeological contributions provide no definite clues for determining whether or not the Bible is completely authentic and accurate in all its claims.

 

Claim No. 5 Tacitus
The same account was mentioned in the history of the Roman Empire (Annals 15:44)

 

The Roman historian Tacitus wrote concerning the Great Fire of Rome, in book 15, chapter 44 of his Annals (c. 116): Auctor nominis eius Christus Tibero imperitante per procuratorem Pontium Pilatum supplicio adfectus erat…

Translated in English as:

Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius:

 

The problem with this claim:

The Roman historian Cornelius Tacitus, occasionally reported stories which were false historically but were true in a literary sense or a moral sense. (E.P. Sanders, The Historical Figure of Jesus (New York: Penguin, 1993) (Tacitus: The Annals of Imperial Rome (Penguin Books, 1973)

Also bear in mind that the historian Tacitus did not live during the purported time of Jesus but was born two decades after Jesus alleged death; thus, if there were any passages in his work referring to Christ or his immediate followers, they would be hand-me-down stories.

Even in the book of Jewish antiquities, we can find this account:

About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was one who performed surprising deeds and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Messiah. And when, upon the accusation of the principal men among us, Pilate had condemned him to a cross, those who had first come to love him did not cease. He appeared to them spending a third day restored to life, for the prophets of God had foretold these things and a thousand other marvels about him. And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared.

- Jewish Antiquities, 18.3.3 §63 written by Flavius Josephus

 

The problem of this claim:

 

1. It is unlikely that Josephus, a Jew, would have called Jesus the Messiah.

 

2. The passage is never quoted by Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, or Origen, despite its enormous apologetic value.

 

3. From the fact that Josephus needed to distinguish this Jesus from other people in his book named Jesus, it does not follow that the phrase "called the Christ" was the most likely way Josephus could have identified Jesus. Josephus could have also said, "the one who was crucified by Pilate," since Josephus' earlier reference to Jesus did mention that point.

 

4. It is unlikely that Josephus would have written the other italicized phrases; Most scholars suspect there has been at least some tampering with the text on the basis of some or all of the italicized sections. Thus scholarly opinion can be divided into three camps: those who accept the entire passage as authentic; those who reject the entire passage as a Christian interpolation into the text (perhaps authored by the fourth-century church historian Eusebius); and those who believe that the original text contained an authentic reference to Jesus but was later embellished by Christian copyists.

 

 

That’s the problem with claims. Most people seem to shy off from other explanations just to defend their contentions.  If you would like to respond questions, - questions like why we should believe in the BIBLE, - well carefully and honestly is not enough. You should answer it free from biases and historically accurate as possible.

 

Until next time,

John the Atheist

“If you can’t beat them, join them”. I think that what on the mind of these Bible apologists when they say that you can find some references about dinosaurs in the pages of their “holy book”.

 

First when paleontologists discover the existence of dinosaur fossils, Christians retorted by saying that these bones were placed by Satan to deceive us to believe that dinosaur exist. Well so far so good. When people didn’t buy this cockeyed explanation, some Christian sect made stories that say God created the dinosaur together with human being, and what best reference they can show other than what was written in their “Holy Bible”.

 

The Behemoth

According to Christians, the Book of Job is the evidence that dinosaurs can be found in the Bible…Hmmm let us see.

 

Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox. Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly. He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together. His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron. He is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him . Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play. He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens. The shady trees cover him with their shadow; the willows of the brook compass him about. Behold, he drinketh up a river, and hasteth not: he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth. He taketh it with his eyes: his nose pierceth through snares. (Job 40:15-24 KJV)

 

Isn’t that great or what. Lo and behold, Job is talking about a sauropod, a Brachiosaurus. Yeah right…

 

(For more of this article, click here!)

If you entered a Christian chat room or if you engage a talk to any Christian fundy, the first thing he will do is to make sure you accept Jesus as your personal Savior.
Jesus who?
Oh, come on you gotta be kidding me.

Most of the readers may think that I am fooling around if I say that I do not really know whom this Jesus H. Christ is. In the first place, this Jesus is so popular like the Marlboro Man and the Beatles, it is quite impossible to say that you do not know who this Jesus is.
N. Geisler even wrote some chapters on his fundy book, “When Skeptics Ask” devoted to this Jesus character and even compares Jesus to other religious or philosophical people. Therefore, this Jesus person is that important huh. Talk about being a big shot!

Most Christians that I have chat in the internet asked me what is it like to live without Jesus H. Christ in my life and they always insisted that Have I felt Jesus have already done something special in my life; Now here’s my answer, NOTHING, NADA, ZIP and lots of it. That statement can really piss off any Christian.

And to top it all, Christians still insist that he is a god. So how can I say something like that? Maybe Christians who are reading my blog might say that I’m just being unfair, bias and they will never tolerate anybody that trash talks their Savior.
Oh come on, I’m just saying facts here.

So you think Jesus is really that important huh? OK…let’s talk about it. Let’s talk about Jezzez Rice!

HERE’S THE FACTS! This Jesus fellow never really contributed much to society in general. On the whole, Jesus said little that was worthwhile. He introduced nothing new to ethics (except hell). He instituted no social programs. Being a god, he is supposed to be "omniscient," he could have shared some useful technology or medicine to the Hebrews, yet he appeared ignorant of such things. Let’s put this statement in a more specific manner.

According to Christian legend, Jesus was born in the time when Palestine was under the rule of Rome. In those times, slavery prevails and very common. I was just wondering. What did Jesus say or did to abolished slavery? What’s worst, Jesus encouraged the beating of slaves. (Luke 12:47). He never denounced servitude, but quite the contrary, incorporated the master-slave relationship into many of his parables. Also, what did Jesus did to bring about something in the issue of International Relation. Surely, Christian says that Jesus was God, so is it impossible for a god to talk to Roman authorities and knock some senses in their heads? Well, today the United Nations is capable of putting conquering states at bay. I wonder why a god could not accomplish this feat.

Jesus did nothing to alleviate poverty. Rather than sell some expensive ointment to help the poor, Jesus wasted it on himself, saying, "Ye have the poor with you always" (Mark 14:3-7).


Does Jesus do something to champion woman emancipation, women’s right and intolerance toward other culture? No women were chosen as his apostles or invited to the Last Supper. In Mark 7:27 ("But Jesus said unto her, Let the children first be filled: for it is not meet to take the children’s bread, and to cast it unto the dogs. "). Imagine! Jesus equated non-Jews with dogs. It looks like Jesus teaches intolerance towards other religion and culture. Now just imagine what kind of a person will instruct his followers to kill in front of him those who don’t want him to be king ( Luke 19:27). By relating this incident, Jesus is implicitly condoning executions!

Christian believers say that Jesus turn water into wine, have healed the sick and resurrected the dead. Wow! Great feats of miracles! But when did this god-man turned health contagious? Did Jesus eradicate leprosy? Scientists, which are not gods, have eradicated small pox. So what disease did this god-man have wipe out when he was on earth? What he taught to his disciples was that sickness were caused by demons possessing our body or you need God’s forgiveness to be cure of your illness instead of teaching people that diseases are cause by tiny life forms called “germs”, and proper hygiene can lessen the chances of having a disease. Christians say that Jesus made the blind to see and the lame to walk again. Have he taught the Hebrews how to cure polio or glaucoma? Have he taught the Israelites how to cure different ailments using simple medicinal herbs? How about teaching the Hebrews of turning dirty desert water into drinkable table water or a new agricultural technology that will make fig trees bear fruits even if it’s not fig season? All I have read so far in the Gospel is that Jesus knows how to curse fig trees. Does short time miracles really the only solution this god-man knows?

Now for Christians, Jesus is the sacrifice God use to take away the sins of the world. Hmmmm.. According to Jewish belief, you need to kill an animal to serve as a burnt offering for your sins. Does this mean Jesus is as good as a sacrificial goat? Beside, after Jesus is offer as a sacrifice like a temple animal to please God wrath to humanity, still sin is around every corner. Nothing really changed that much.

Christians will tell you that Jesus was send to us so we may have everlasting life. That is why it is very important to know Jesus. Yet the same Bible said to us that, “As the cloud is consumed and vanisheth away: so he that goeth down to the grave shall come up no more” - JOB 7:9 and "Man's fate is like that of the animals; the same fate awaits them both: As one dies, so dies the other. All have the same breath; man has no advantage over the animal....all come from dust, and to dust all return. Who knows if the spirit of man rises upward and if the spirit of the animal goes down into the earth?" - Eccle. 3:19-21 NIV.

You will have a perfect idea about Jesus’ credibility after reading most of his self- prophesies concerning his eminent return or second-coming as Christians called it. In Matthew 24:27-34 Jesus gave his disciples a complete picture of his return. According to Jesus “…This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled”. Now, when Jesus spoke of this prophesy, he was talking to his disciples, right. Therefore, when he said “this generation” he was not speaking of generation circa 2006. He was speaking of their generation! Jesus strongly stated this prophecy would be fulfilling in the lifetime of his generation. Now, nearly 2,000 years have passed still no sign of his second coming. Used primarily to frighten the wits of Christians into compliance, this prophecy now exposes a gigantic falsehood. The Son of man has not come as he predicted. Generation after generation has passed away and the prophet of Nazareth stands convicted as an imposter. It is more specific than most predictions and so provides a good test of the reality of Christ's pretenses.
Again by flipping the pages of the New Testament we see JOHN 5:25 ("I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live...."). Another false prophecy by Jesus! "And now is" shows that this was to occur at that time. (Also see: MATT. 16:18, Matt. 10:23, Mark 9:1) Christian apologetic attempts to apply the word "generation" to the Jewish people and that Jesus was speaking about the “last days” on those other chapters and verses. However, modern scholars said that this “prophecy” is said to happened about 80-90 CE.
In Mark 14:62, Jesus told the chief priests, “ Ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand power and coming in the clouds of heaven”. Yet the chief priests have been dead for 2000 years or more, never lived to see Jesus coming from the cloud of heaven.

Now in a last ditch effort, a Christian might try to convince me about Jesus based on his moral teachings. According to Mr. Norman Geisler, Jesus moral was superior compare to Buddha, Lao Tse and Socrates. A certain person even tried to persuade me on liking this Jesus character because he claims Jesus taught us the Golden Rule. But Whoa! Wait a minute there. The Golden Rule is a universal rule and people like Confucius have already taught us that rule 3000 years before Jesus. But does Jesus really have a superior moral standard?
1. "While he was speaking, a Pharisee asked him to dine with him; so he went in and sat at table. The Pharisee was astonished to see that he did not at first wash before dinner. And the Lord said to him, `Now you Pharisees cleanse the outside of the cup and of the dish, but inside you are full of extortion and wickedness. You fools! Did not he who made the outside make the inside also?...woe to you Pharisees! for you tithe mint and rue and every herb, and neglect justice and the love of God; these you ought to have done...'" (Luke 11:37-44 RSV).
Now this is an example of blatant rudeness! Imagine talking like this to someone in his house after he invited you to dine with him. Even if it were true, common decency dictated a more refined approach.

2. "So the devils besought him saying, If thou cast us out, suffer us to go away into the herd of swine. And he said unto them, Go. And when they were come out they went into the herd of swine; and, behold, the whole herd of swine ran violently down a steep place into the sea, and perished in the waters" (Matt. 8:31.32).

 
What had the owner or owners done to have their property destroyed by Jesus? What had the animals done to deserve such treatment? What happened to animal rights huh?

3. "Go ye into the village over against you; in the which at your entering ye shall find a colt tied, whereon yet never man sat: loose him, and bring him hither. And if any man ask you, why do ye loose him? thus shall ye say unto him, Because the Lord hath need of him. And they that were sent went their way, and found even as he had said unto them. And as they were loosing the colt, the owners thereof said unto them, Why loose ye the colt?" (Luke 19:30-33).
Are we to believe this isn't stealing? Imagine seeing an unfamiliar person driving your car away while claiming the lord needed it.

4. "Verily, I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my sake, and the gospel's, But he shall receive an hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecution, and in the world to come eternal life" (Mark 10:29-30).
This teaching is not only immoral, but erroneous as well. Jesus is saying that the reward for giving up your wealth and following him is far greater wealth; So that means people should do right in order to obtain personal gain, not because it is the right act to do. Self-aggrandizement is not a decent basis for morality.

 
5. "Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees which were of Jerusalem, saying, `Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread.' But he answered and said unto them, `Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?'" (Matt. 15:1-3).
The statement “Why do ye also" is admittance by Jesus that his disciples were violating a commandment of God. He doesn't deny they are breaking God's law; he simply says that his critics are guilty of the same offense.

 
6. "then shall he say unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was an hungered, and ye gave me no meat;..." (Matt. 25:41-42) and "when he saw a fig tree in the way, he came to it, and found nothing thereon, but leaves only and said unto it, Let no fruit grow on thee hencefoward for ever. And presently the fig tree withered away" (Matt. 21:18-19).

Here Jesus failed to show the mercy his believers claim he has. An eternal curse resulting from disappointed hunger is hardly the reaction of a divinely merciful being equal to God. Killing a tree for lacking fruit isn't indicative of a reasonably merciful and composed individual.

7. "the Son of man has come eating and drinking; and you say, `Behold, a glutton and a drundard..." (Luke 7:34 RSV).
If this comment is true, and there is little evidence to the contrary, Jesus' character is, indeed, substandard.

8. "There is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands for my sake, and the gospel's, But he shall receive an hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands..." (Mark 10:29-30).

Promising one's followers immense riches is actually a form of bribery.

9. "So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple" (Luke 14:33) and "Jesus said unto him, `If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me'" (Matt. 19:21) and (Mark 10:21, Luke 3:11, 11:41, 12:35, 18:22) yet on Mark 2:15 it is said that "And it came to pass, that, as Jesus sat at meat in his house". Jesus has a house while telling others to surrender their wealth.

10. Jesus said, "If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true" (John 5:31) and later stated, "I am one that bear witness of myself..." (John 8:18). The logical conclusion to be drawn from combining these two statements is that Jesus disproved his own honesty.

11. Jesus told us to "Love your enemies, bless them that curse you" but ignored his own advice by repeatedly denouncing his opposition. Matt. 23:17 ("Ye fools and blind"), Matt. 12:34 ("O generation of vipers"), and Matt. 23:17 ("...hypocrites...ye are like unto whited sepulchers....") These are excellent examples of hypocrisy.

12. "If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple" (Luke 14:26). "I am come to set man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household" (Matt. 10:35-36). When one of his disciples requested time off for his father's funeral, Jesus rebuked him by saying "Let the dead bury their dead" (Matt. 8:22). Jesus never used the word "family" and he never married or fathered children. To his own mother, he said, "Woman, what have I to do with thee?" (John 2:4).


So what kind of family value does this Jesus taught us?

13. Jesus said that whoever calls somebody a "fool" shall be in danger of hell fire (Matt. 5:22), yet he called people "fools" himself (Matt. 23:17).

14. He appeared to suffer from a dictator's "paranoia" when he said, "He that is not with me is against me" (Matt. 12:30).


And here are some more of Jesus so called “superior moral teaching”.
• Marrying a divorced woman is adultery (Matt. 5:32).
• Don't plan for the future (Matt. 6:34)
• Don't work to obtain food (John 6:27)
• Don’t save money (Matt. 6:19-20)
• Take the money from those who have no savings and give it to rich investors (Luke 19:23-26)
• If someone asks you for anything, give it to them without question (Matt. 5:42)
• If you lose a lawsuit, give more than the judgment (Matt. 5:40)

(Source: Biblical Errancy by Dennis McKinsey)

So when a Christian told me things about Jesus, and by comparing what history and Biblical mythology have to say about this person, I always ask the Christian back, “Jesus who?”

1. Its Honesty
Does a book full of inconsistency and inaccuracy is honest? Well that's what is all about the Bible. In the first place, the Bible is recycled Middle Eastern myths. Tampered by the Jews to look like their original faith. Then we have the Romans to blame with the New Testaments stories. And lastly, three cheers to the Christian fundies for interpreting it differently to suit their congregation’s own belief. Now how that for being honest?


2. Its Preservation
The Muslim Qur’an was also preserved. So does the Bhagavad-Gita, the Kojiki, The Dharma and other sacred texts. Now what’s funny is that the original “Bible” was not preserve (Woah!). It is lost. So what’s this with the preservation claim?

3. Its Claims For Itself.
Well, when something claims by itself, doesn’t it make the claim self-serving and bias?

4. Its Miracles
What miracles? Are they been proven as factual? Well in the DC Comics, Superman can fly. In Marvel Comics, Spiderman can walk on walls. What’s the difference with a guy who walks on water?


5. Its Unity
Unity means an unreduced or unbroken completeness or totality. Here’s an example of biblical unity:
EXO 15:3 The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name.
ROM 15:33 Now the God of peace be with you all. Amen.
6. Its Historical And Geographical Accuracy
Really? Well let see what the Bible really says:
a.) "Then he returned from the region of Tyre, and went through Sidon to the Sea of Galilee, through the region of the Decapolis" (Mark 7:31 RSV). The geographical knowledge of Mark's author is questionable in that it's hard to imagine going from Tyre to the Sea of Galilee by passing through Sidon, much less the region of Decapolis. Sidon is to the north of Tyre and the Sea of Galilee while Decapolis is to the south of Tyre and the Sea of Galilee. This assertion was made by Mark when there were no coasts of Decapolis, nor was the name so much as known before the reign of the emperor Nero.
b.) "Again the devil taketh him up into an exceedingly high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world,...." (Matt. 4:8). How could anyone see the whole world from one spot, even the known world at that time?
c.) "That very night Belshazzar the Chaldean king was slain. And Darius the Mede received the kingdom being about 62 years old." (Dan. 5:30-31 RSV).
(a) Belshazzar was not the king of Babylon. Nabonidus was the king of Babylon at the demise of the Chaldean Empire. Belshazzar was his son.
(b) Darius never took the kingdom nor was he ever king of Babylon.
(c) There is no reference to Darius the Mede in any ancient document we have today.
(d) Profane history says it was Cyrus the Persian who conquered the Babylonian empire.
Need to say more?
7. Its Endorsement By Christ
Tell me what chapter or verse in the NT that was endorsed by the Anointed One?
Now here’s a sample of your endorser’s statement. ·John 8:14 "Though I bear record of myself, yet my record is true."
vs.
·John 5:31 "If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true."


8. Its Prophetic Accuracy
Hmmmmm. Let see how accurate?
1. "And He (God--John.) said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them 400 years" (Gen. 15:13) and "God spake on this wise, That his seed should sojourn in a strange land; and that they should bring them into bondage, and entreat them evil 400 years" (Acts 7:6) versus "Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, who dwelt in Egypt, was 430 years" (Ex. 12:40). According to prophecy the Israelites were to be in bondage for 400 years, not 430.
2. "Behold therefore, I will gather thee unto thy fathers, and thou shalt be gathered into thy graves in peace" (2 Kings 22:20). The prophetess, Huldah, predicted that Josiah would die in peace. Yet, 2 Kings 23:29-30 ("In his days Paraoah-nechoh king of Egypt went up against the king of Assyria to the river Euphrates; and King Josiah went against him; and he slew him at Megiddo, when he had seen him. And his servants carried him in a chariot dead from Megiddo, and brought him to Jerusalem and buried him....And the people of the land took Jehoahaz the son of Josiah, and anointed him, and made him king in his father's stead") shows this didn't occur.
3. "...thou shalt be built no more...." (Ezek. 26:14) and "For thus saith the Lord God; When I shall make thee (Tyre--John.) a desolate city like the cities that are not inhabited; when I shall bring up the deep upon thee and great waters shall cover thee;....and shall set thee in the low parts of the earth,...that thou be not inhabited;....I will make thee a terror, and thou shalt be no more: though thou be sought for, yet shalt thou never be found again,...." (Ezek. 26:19-21) and "The merchants among the people shall hiss at thee (Tyre--John.), thou shalt be a terror, and never shalt be any more" (Ezek. 27:36) and (Ezek. 28:19). In other words, Tyre will be destroyed and never rebuilt. But, as the following verses show, Tyre existed throughout NT times and still exists today. "And from thence he arose, and went into the borders of Tyre and Sidon,..." (Mark 7:24) and "And again, departing from the coasts of Tyre and Sidon, he came unto the sea of Galilee,..." (Mark 7i:31) and "Herod was highly displeased with them of Tyre and Sidon..." (Acts 12:20) and (Acts 21:3, 7, Matt. 15:21, 3:8).

9. Its Survival
Well other holy scriptures also survives up to this time.

10. Its Power To Change Lives and destroys them.
Other holy scriptures also claim to change lives.

So why believe the Bible?
Ciao!

You guys think you’re better than everybody huh? Really? Well that’s because most religion teaches humans are higher than the average beast. Just look at the Judeo-Christian belief than man was made above all creatures. And he is supposed to be the caretaker of the beasts in land, air and water. WHAT!!! Wait a minute there buddy. These animals can take care of themselves, thanks for the help.

Animals don’t need human help. They’re been living in this world long before, that’s why we called it the “wild life”. They don’t need to be domesticated. Without human interventions, these wildlife, from the smallest bacteria to the largest whale, have been living perfectly…well..till human showed up anyway. So what’s with the “let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.”
We don’t have any authority to their lives.

Just think of this, all creatures, great and small, has it’s own special way to live in this planet. No one is better than the other. We may say we are bigger or smarter than a bacteria or a virus, but these little guys has the capacity to wipe us out of existence. We can’t out run the cheetah nor can we fly as gracefully as an eagle. We still need tools so we can adapt on our environment. Without it WELL…

So let us just face it, you’re so biased. Too much anthropocentrism in your part I suppose. Well, naturally, you make gods in your own image so; it’s just making yourselves as Gods. But do you know that we humans are the most damaging creatures in this planet. Termites have been sharing the blame with ozone layer destruction but we just get the whole booty. Our so-called smart asses have been damaging this environment with waste dumps from our residence, commercial and industrial consumptions. Our tools have been causing harm in our whole geo-sphere. We are the number 1 cause of animals and plants life extinction. Talk about dominion over the Earth.

Remember, we’re living in a delicate balance world. One wrong move and the balance will be destroyed. Not even your gods can save you when that happened. We don’t have dominion over this planet; it is this planet that has authority over us. We mess up with Earth, it mess us up. What we must remember is that every living thing in this planet has a right to live and survive. This is our home, all of us, microbes, plants, bugs, fishes, people, even our pets. No one has any authority over each and everyone. Instead of authority, we must learn to share and live with them side by side.


John the Atheist