If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Breitbart.com)   'The Bible', airing in March, promises to be a faithful adaptation of the stories of ancient peoples and their alien sky-wizards   (breitbart.com) divider line 225
    More: Interesting, Bibles, Hollywood, melody, Mark Burnett, adaptations, superstar, Darren Aronofsky  
•       •       •

2047 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 11 Jan 2013 at 9:37 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



225 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-11 09:55:24 PM  

Bonzo_1116: Epicedion: Gone to Plaid: These are very good points. God may have been bipolar with his "Love me or die" theme in the old testament, but the message Jesus brought with him wasn't so bad. A message that most religious 'leaders' seem to have forgotten.

On a more technical track, that's a major strike against the Bible being a reliable portrayal of God. If you change a couple names there's no indication that the Old Testament and New Testament have very much to do with each other, and the gods are completely different.

This is why Jews aren't Christian.


It's the _same_ god. You have to look at the themes throughout both sets of books.
 
2013-01-11 10:04:04 PM  

Felix_T_Cat: Hmm, I guess I got to the end of my skills at surviving life and found them dismally insufficient. I looked for who was happy and was thoroughly annoyed to find that people who talked about god generally appeared to be happy. More so than any others. Not Christians mind you, just 'generic' god people...............


Interesting. What's your take on the idea of Original Sin? I always thought it was indicative of a flaw in the idea of a truly omnipotent and benevolent God...or free will if the fix for the problem it absolutely requires Jesus and nothing else.

It also seems like you had to hit bottom before you swapped over to church.
 
2013-01-11 10:06:03 PM  
Well, looks like springtime in Florida is shaping up to be a lot of fun. I better stock up on my aneursym medicine now while I have the chance.
 
2013-01-11 10:09:57 PM  

Felix_T_Cat: Bonzo_1116: Epicedion: Gone to Plaid: These are very good points. God may have been bipolar with his "Love me or die" theme in the old testament, but the message Jesus brought with him wasn't so bad. A message that most religious 'leaders' seem to have forgotten.

On a more technical track, that's a major strike against the Bible being a reliable portrayal of God. If you change a couple names there's no indication that the Old Testament and New Testament have very much to do with each other, and the gods are completely different.

This is why Jews aren't Christian.

It's the _same_ god. You have to look at the themes throughout both sets of books.


A god that splits himself into a human that walks the earth as a normal man for a lifetime doesn't mesh very well with Old Testament Yahweh. Allah has more in common with Yahweh. More fiercely monotheistic.

The talk of sacrifice to atone for sins / covenants with various peoples does match up though. The whole "avatar of the divine appears on earth and urges everyone to get with the program" has more of a Hindu feel to me, though.
 
2013-01-11 11:02:56 PM  
rlv.zcache.com


/204 comments and no warning label jpg?
//Fark, I am dissapoint
///Now to read the thread...
 
2013-01-11 11:54:19 PM  

Charlie Chingas: Farking Canuck: bluelime: Pincy: Burden of proof my friend.

So just to be clear, your stance is that, until proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, anything other than what you believe is wrong and people who believe it are stupid?

Nobody suggests that anything can or needs to be proven beyond a doubt. Please do not suggest that we are asking for this.

What would be nice is even a scrap of evidence beyond "my mommy and daddy told me it is true".

In a way, religious people are not mocked for what they believe ... they are mocked for why they believe it.

'nough said.

christians believe what they believe because someone told them to, not because they chose it.


Much like we mock Teabaggers and Fox News watchers. They can't actually prove that Obama is a Muslim or explain why he is a "Socialist", they just believe it because Sean Hannity said it or they read it on Breitbart.
 
2013-01-11 11:58:45 PM  

meat0918: And I forgot to ask.

Which translation are they using?


It's kind of funny that an entity so powerful and wise "wrote" a book so full of contradictions and open enough to interpretation to lead to schisms, sects and reformations within Christianity and Judaism.
 
2013-01-12 12:05:52 AM  
Look I have no proof that there is no God, but there is no proof that there is one either. I am an Atheist. I do not mock those that have faith but I also do not want their beliefs to infringe on others rights. You can believe eating pork is forbidden in your religeon but the minute you try to make that illegal for everybody else your "Rights" end. So that would go for reproductive rights, death penalty, assisted suicide, eating shrimp, wearing two different kinds of cloth, and whateverer your deal is. You want to sacrifice goats then what do I care as long as it doesn't effect me at all?

/to reasonable for Fark?
 
2013-01-12 12:46:15 AM  

Dorf11: kid_icarus: As portrayed by middle-eastern Caucasians.

Middle-eastern Caucasians with British accents.


Maybe that is what resided in the area at the time. Heck. we know just about as much concrete proof of the Bible so why not? Maybe magic really did exist back then, and when God left earth so did the magic. :O
 
2013-01-12 01:56:06 AM  

Felix_T_Cat: I wouldn't do this if there was no benefit


Placebos have been proven, with that evidence stuff you guys hate so much, to work beyond a doubt. So I am glad religion works for you.

The problem for a lot of us is that we can't put the cat back in the bag. We woke up and smelled the coffee ... we see religions for what they are and cannot go back to sleep and live happily in dreamland again.

No evidence, no belief. Simple math. Works for everything including religions.
 
2013-01-12 02:56:06 AM  

Kali-Yuga: Light created on the first day. - The cause of light - stars and the sun, created on the fourth day

I can continue with more examples of the literally thousands of contradictions, and hundreds of historical, and scientific errors contained in the bible if you'd like.


Check the handle of the person you're arguing with.
 
2013-01-12 05:55:30 AM  
"What is his name?" "Jesus."

BZZZZZZZZT. WRONG. The christian savior's name was Joshua. Jesus was an additional name he picked up later in his time as a Rabbi. Additionally, "Christ" was a title, not a part of his name, the interpretation of it as a last name is a result of British tradition where non-nobles were referred to by their profession as an ad-hoc surname, a tradition that didn't exist until the middle ages, iirc. So when he was a baby, named in the semitic tradition, Jesus' name would have been Joshua bin Josef. Or Yeshua, depending how finnicky you want to be about the transliteration of the name.

I mean, come the fark on. I know that the "all the actors are white" thing is mostly a result of, y'know, the majority of the available actors for c-grade history channel fiction being white, so that's forgivable. But why the fark wouldn't you even familiarize yourself with the damned bible when writing a movie named "The Bible"? Christ.
 
2013-01-12 06:18:26 AM  
I don't care how "accurate" they say it is! If it doesn't portray my personal interpretation of the meaning God's Word, it's an unchristian changing the words of the Bible!
 
2013-01-12 06:25:41 AM  

jjwars1: gshepnyc: jjwars1: The skywizard thing is old and tired. Atheists, if you want religious folks to respect your opinion and take you seriously you'll have to quit acting like you are the superior supreme being douche, and treat them with the same amount of respect as you command.

Sorry, pursuing a view of the universe and our place in it based on reason, evidence, scrutiny and skepticism is NOT equally weighted with pursuing the same based on a personal relationship with a mystical, mythological being who can allegedly suspend the laws of nature to suit his adherent's needs.

You are entitled to believe in total horseshiat if you want to but you are out of your mind to expect that that entitles you to respect. Quite the opposite, actually. Especially when you use that horseshiat to try and shape policy, affect the lives of non-believers and the like.

I really don't know what you are talking about. I don't use horseshiat to shape policy or affect the lives of non-believers nor do I think the fact based science approach entitles others to be disrespectful of people or give them the right to act like they are superior.

Respect is a simple concept people have a difficult time grasping, and they like to use strawman arguments as a reason why they shouldn't act like decent human beings.


maybe you shouldn't think that your sacred cow is above mockery. this is a message board francis
 
2013-01-12 08:36:42 AM  

jjwars1: The skywizard thing is old and tired. Atheists, if you want religious folks to respect your opinion and take you seriously you'll have to quit acting like you are the superior supreme being douche, and treat them with the same amount of respect as you command.


The only thing that you religious twats can offer up to support your ridiculous position is the idea that there is some kind of mythical being that farts rainbows.

No, I'm not going to respect that. Until you show me some evidence.

And while you're at it, show me how your personal "God" is any more real than Thor, Zeus, or any number of other the other alleged shiatstains that turn people into salt and send people to this "Hell" place that you farkers believe in.
 
2013-01-12 09:35:26 AM  

Trapper439: jjwars1: The skywizard thing is old and tired. Atheists, if you want religious folks to respect your opinion and take you seriously you'll have to quit acting like you are the superior supreme being douche, and treat them with the same amount of respect as you command.

The only thing that you religious twats can offer up to support your ridiculous position is the idea that there is some kind of mythical being that farts rainbows.

No, I'm not going to respect that. Until you show me some evidence.

And while you're at it, show me how your personal "God" is any more real than Thor, Zeus, or any number of other the other alleged shiatstains that turn people into salt and send people to this "Hell" place that you farkers believe in.


Who owes you evidence? We 'religious twats' are talking about things that are the literal definition of 'Transcendent'.

If you're so arrogant, so self-absorbed, so full of hubris that a deity of any sort needs to prostrate themselves in front of you in order for you to believe that you're *not* the center of the universe, then there's hardly any point.

You've already appointed yourself God in your own head.

You have no idea how small you look to us. How lost.

We're not angry at you. We're sorry for you. We know we will always have more in common with people of other religious faiths than we'll ever have with you.

When you wake up tomorrow, in that half second right after you open your eyes and oblivion is drowned out by the flood of life pouring into your consciousness, you'll have known God. Too bad you won't recognize Him.
 
2013-01-12 10:37:36 AM  

PIP_the_TROLL: Who owes you evidence?


i560.photobucket.com

We 'religious twats' are talking about things that are the literal definition of 'Transcendent'.

If you're so arrogant, so self-absorbed, so full of hubris that a deity of any sort needs to prostrate themselves in front of you in order for you to believe that you're *not* the center of the universe, then there's hardly any point.


What about those of us who can't make ourselves believe in things that we have no reason to believe in? If you believe in your god despite the utter lack of evidence, then why do you believe in that specific god? Why not any of the other million silly things people have made up in the course of human history.

The problem is that to me, your religion is no more real than the story about Jack and the beanstalk. If you think this has anything to do with hubris or massive egos (as your post more than suggests), then you simply do not understand why people do not believe in your specific fairy tale / religion.

I do not believe in gods because I have never in my life seen any reason to do so. Period. It's not about hubris or arrogance, it's about reason.
 
2013-01-12 12:22:02 PM  

Uncle Tractor: It's not about hubris or arrogance, it's about reason.


Bullshiat. Your life is influenced on a constant basis by forces you're physically unaware of and which neither you, nor science can explain.

You've done nothing but make a choice to say 'there is no God', with no more evidentiary reason to say so than any religious person has to say the opposite. Lack of physical evidence is not evidence of lack.

I'm not arguing that you need to believe in the Judeo-Christian God or in gods at all. I'm arguing that it's indefensible to take an affirmative position *against* the idea of a supreme being or power of any kind. We came here and found this universe. We're hairless primates that have barely been walking around long enough to take a decent shiat and you think you've got all the answers? That your fellow man has? That our towering intellects rise to the level of which we can say our hastily cobbled together view of the universe has divine veracity? You're telling me that's not hubris? Open a dictionary and read the definition.

200 years from now, our descendants will be laughing at us with the same disdain with which we regard bloodletters. They will have provided themselves a new world view that has built on and abandoned portions of ours. They'll want, as you do, to believe that if you understand what's out in the dark, it won't be scary anymore.

It's doubt that terrifies atheists. And the only ways to fight it are with faith or with lies we tell ourselves to make us feel safe that we can quantify and understand things that we really don't.

The questions will be different. The answers will be different. They'll call it an improvement over our unenlightened times as they replace our lies with theirs.

And some of them, again, will *know* that's the truth.
 
2013-01-12 12:43:15 PM  
Jesus was an extraterrestrial.
 
2013-01-12 12:56:06 PM  
Is Mel Gibson involved with any of this?
 
2013-01-12 01:53:15 PM  

PIP_the_TROLL: Bullshiat. Your life is influenced on a constant basis by forces you're physically unaware of and which neither you, nor science can explain.


On what basis do you make that claim? I'm not sure whether to call bullshiat or troll.

You've done nothing but make a choice to say 'there is no God',

No such choice was made. One day I realized that I didn't believe in gods. It wasn't a choice. Did you choose not to believe in Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny?

with no more evidentiary reason to say so than any religious person has to say the opposite. Lack of physical evidence is not evidence of lack.

Nope, but when presented with claims that violate the known laws of nature, my answer will always be "show me."

I'm not arguing that you need to believe in the Judeo-Christian God or in gods at all. I'm arguing that it's indefensible to take an affirmative position *against* the idea of a supreme being or power of any kind.

I haven't even done that much. No evidence for => no reason to consider the possibility.

We came here and found this universe.

No: We were born in this universe, and we are every bit as much part of it as anything else in it.

We're hairless primates that have barely been walking around long enough to take a decent shiat and you think you've got all the answers?

Strawman #1.

That your fellow man has? That our towering intellects rise to the level of which we can say our hastily cobbled together view of the universe has divine veracity?

Strawman #2.

It's doubt that terrifies atheists.

Uh, no. If anything, doubt leads to atheism. Certainty is for the theists who "know" that there is a god.
 
2013-01-12 03:07:40 PM  
Pip the t r o l l.
 
2013-01-12 04:18:31 PM  

Smackledorfer: Pip the t r o l l.


I know, but it's hard to tell these days. There are too many sincerely derpy people around.
 
2013-01-13 09:06:15 PM  

Bonzo_1116: Felix_T_Cat: Bonzo_1116: Epicedion: Gone to Plaid: These are very good points. God may have been bipolar with his "Love me or die" theme in the old testament, but the message Jesus brought with him wasn't so bad. A message that most religious 'leaders' seem to have forgotten.

On a more technical track, that's a major strike against the Bible being a reliable portrayal of God. If you change a couple names there's no indication that the Old Testament and New Testament have very much to do with each other, and the gods are completely different.

This is why Jews aren't Christian.

It's the _same_ god. You have to look at the themes throughout both sets of books.

A god that splits himself into a human that walks the earth as a normal man for a lifetime doesn't mesh very well with Old Testament Yahweh. Allah has more in common with Yahweh. More fiercely monotheistic.

The talk of sacrifice to atone for sins / covenants with various peoples does match up though. The whole "avatar of the divine appears on earth and urges everyone to get with the program" has more of a Hindu feel to me, though.


Some folks I know regard occurrences of the 'Angel of the Lord' showing up in the old testament as Jesus. You couldn't look at the father and survive, burning mountain, etc... But also God walked with Adam, talked with Enoch, wrestled with Jacob, etc... Also, Angel of the Lord didn't show up when Jesus was around.

Original sin, I haven't really looked into the theology of that. I may someday, but I'm working on more immediate problems (for me) at the moment. Not so much "why is my butt on fire?", but "what do I do about it and how do I prevent it in the future?"

A guy like me. with my ego and determination, it worked out that I had to get to the end of my own attempts before I was open minded enough to try something else. So yeah, I hit bottom. :)
 
2013-01-13 09:26:02 PM  

Farking Canuck: Felix_T_Cat: I wouldn't do this if there was no benefit

Placebos have been proven, with that evidence stuff you guys hate so much, to work beyond a doubt. So I am glad religion works for you.

The problem for a lot of us is that we can't put the cat back in the bag. We woke up and smelled the coffee ... we see religions for what they are and cannot go back to sleep and live happily in dreamland again.

No evidence, no belief. Simple math. Works for everything including religions.


I don't hate evidence. I already laid out the steps I went through. I had an opinion about what religions are and came, through experimentation, to a different view. I do have to agree that christians tend use some pretty awful proofs. I didn't take their word for it though, I checked for myself. Believe me, christian was the _last_ thing I wanted.

I would be a complete ass though, if I hadn't tried to bridge some differences here. If I think I've got the best thing since sliced bread, I'd be a tool not to try & share it. So that's why I've been posting. I really expected to be ripped apart. This has been a pretty moderate religion thread. Thanks.
 
Displayed 25 of 225 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report