Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Why do atheists spend so much time talking about religion?

1235»

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,065 ✭✭✭Fighting Irish


    because religion is ruining the world, simple


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,838 ✭✭✭midlandsmissus


    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    I think that they picked the bits that suited the slant they wanted and most likely cut out the most glaring contradictions. But I can't say anything about them for certain because I've never read them. Because they cut them out. That's the thing about searching for your own truths without having any way to externally verify them: you have no way of knowing if whatever conclusions you've drawn are actually the truth or if you're miles off

    Au contraire. Some of the books are available on the internet if you search. Of course there is no way of proving they are legitimate, but there is other info out there. And there is info on why they kept those books out.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    Au contraire. Some of the books are available on the internet if you search. Of course there is no way of proving they are legitimate, but there is other info out there. And there is info on why they kept those books out.

    Indeed, no way of proving they are legitimate. And there's no way of proving if the info on why they were left out is legitimate. And there's no way of proving that the books they left in are legitimate either. There's no way of proving that any of the bible is legitimate but pointing out glaring errors and inconsistencies in a book that's supposed to be inspired by a perfect being, not to mention all the vicious and spiteful immorality from this supposedly moral being goes a long way towards proving it's illegitimate.

    What's the first thing that comes to your head as something that's in one of these books and why was it left out? I vageuely remember hearing something about Jesus turning people into goats as a child or something but I have no idea where I heard that.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 41 drifting


    What do you think of certain books being left out of the bible by the catholic church?
    The ancient Old Testament Jewish Canon as defined by Sirach circa 200BC contains far fewer books than the bible, and does not include Daniel and Esther. Most of the discrepancies arise with the books written in the two hundred years immediately before Christ when the prophetic inspiration was believed to have been curtailed somewhat, although the number of pseudo-biblical works was fairly extensive in that era.

    Interestingly, the real issue that the RCC has to deal with is why they left the prophetic book of Enoch out of the Canon. If they included Daniel, they should have included Enoch as it was written in a similar era and is of a similar style and more theological. Possibly the reason is that it tended to detract from the centralized view of religion that the RCC wanted to inculcate; so it was a political decision.

    However as regards the core books of the bible, there really isn't that much argument, as they were referred to by Christ himself, and the early pre-RCC church identified most of the NT writings that we have today.


Advertisement