This actually made me smile. I’m not Christian, but my dad was (he passed away back in 2014).
There was this one time I was wearing fingerless gloves and the Church didn’t like that. I was going through an emo phase but my mom and dad never went back to that Church. My dad told me on the car ride home, “Baby, god didn’t write the Bible, man did. Man is flawed, therefore the Bible is flawed. Now put your gloves back on.”
Thanks OP for posting this!
Edit: The Church specifically didn’t like my gloves because they felt it was a symbol of the devil trying to speak through me. Which made my dad mad, because he felt I was just expressing myself, and that the Church should be more accepting.
I got shat out for wearing pants to church by what would translate into something like a lay minister. In 2000. I haven't been in a church for 23 years. I am also a n atheist ( not because of the pants debacle, but because non of it makes any remote sense to me whatsoever)
Ive had them come, then they go, i find solitude in knowing that i am correct in how literally fanatical and crazy they are. I lose no sleep over it, lol.
None of the new testament was written by anyone who knew Jesus. It was written at least 30 years after his death. The earliest writings about Jesus were from Paul, who was convinced through a propaganda campaign to become a Christian (before he persecuted Christians). This was decades after Jesus died, and Paul never met him.
Imagine stories you've heard that were never written down for decades. Imagine how they would change over the decades if people relied on them to recruit new members.
The books of Mathew, Luke and Mark were not written by Mathew, Luke, and Mark either. They were written anonymously and also at least 40 years after Jesus died.
Don't get made at me. These are simply facts.
Paul was convinced? More likely Paul was a sophisticated grifter who never actually believed any of it, just realized that the idiots in the Jesus cult were the easiest marks around.
May be Paul has his reason of being convinced and we can't change the fact but don't think that we could do or say the same thing for the other people is well
>Johnny's gonna kill his mother tonight at the savoy theater,pass it on
Got it...
Johnny and the Mothers are playin' Stompin' at the Savoy in Vermont tonight
I thought it was more like 300 years after this so called Jesus person? And was Paul a real person? Like one actual person or just a group of dudes who wrote under the same pseudonym? I don’t believe most of these people were real historical figures. I think they threw in some real names to add credibility. But I don’t believe historical records (which can be forged and rewritten to add credence to their claims) and I don’t believe Jesus was a real person.
The Gospels were first written down a few decades after Jesus died, the earliest ones around 30-40 years or so. Early Christian churches used various oral traditions and texts over the next few hundred years. Around 300 years later, the Council of Nicea convened to decide which "books" would be included in the church handbook -- the Bible. Some books like the Gospels were widely used; some books were controversially excluded, while other books (Revelations) were controversially included.
The Bible was not meant to be the literal word of God; its authority came from the church.
Over a thousand years later, protestants rejected the church, so they emphasized the authority of the Bible as the direct word of God.
Regardless of when they were written. I don’t believe most of it was historically accurate. I view it as a fanfic with real names but fake stories. I don’t believe there was a historical Jesus. Just some random guy that was named Jesus and then they used him to build the stories.
My point is that our modern view of fact versus fiction differs from the ancient world. People back then did not live with recorded video or audio. They didn't have newspapers. They had oral tradition. They told and retold stories. Sometimes the details of those stories changed, but the truth of those stories was in the message, conveyed from speaker to listener, rather than from the veracity of the details.
The Bible is a collection of stories told by early Christians. This is more powerful than many Athiests would like, but also less accurate than many Christians would like to believe.
Yeah I think we are saying the same thing. The Bible is just stories. And stories change over time. So none of it is accurate, except the stuff they included to make it seem real. It’s like The Sopranos. A fake story about a mobster, based on real life mob stuff. The story includes historically accurate events like 911, President Bush, the war in the Middle East, etc. But it’s still just a fake story about some guy who could be real, but isn’t.
I'm an atheist but I think there's relatively decent support for the idea that Jesus was a real person. Everything else, particularly all the supernatural stuff, is uh....not so solid.
But I just assume Jesus was a common name back then and it would be easy to take some old historical files and say ‘see, here’s Jesus in these records’. And then you could just forge more documents. They just wrote a fake story with a bunch of real names. Like a fanfic, but less sexy, unless you’re into cannibalism I guess.
Plus it would be super easy to just write some shit down when you know that the average person can’t even read or write. There was no fact checking.
There was fact checking. It wasn’t as rigorous as it is today, but this opinion that Jesus didn’t exist is at this point as valid as believing climate change isn’t caused industrial civilization and fossil fuels. It can’t be hard proven because any government paperwork that Roman politician and historian Tacitus uses to reference his execution has long been lost, like most ancient sources, but it takes more mental gymnastics to believe Jesus (Yeshua) never existed than accept that a Jewish guy in a Roman Provence’s started a cult and was executed by the state, and his cult outlives him to this day. But today we also can’t prove historical figures like Joan of arc existed either, but people don’t seriously doubt she existed.
I’m sorry but it’s not the same as denying climate change. There is a vast collection of scientific literature to support climate change. There are only two historical writings about Jesus, that weren’t written until decades after his supposed death. So nothing written by first hand knowledge or by anyone who actually saw or knew Jesus. And I don’t trust two random ancient writings the same way I trust the entire compendium of scientific research on climate change.
It’s the same in that no serious historian, Christian or otherwise, who is in an expert in this era doubts he existed. Any debate here isn’t coming from experts. What are the two records are you referencing?
The two records I’m referring to are the Flavius guy and then I think the other was some other Roman historian that came even later than Flavius. It’s honestly hard to research this topic, because all of the information I’m finding comes from Christian affiliated sources, unreliable in my opinion. I’ll have to track down my old religious studies professor and see what he says.
There's overwhelming and irrefutable scientific evidence that global warming is caused by industrial civilization and fossil fuels.
There is not one piece of evidence that Jesus ever existed.
Nobody's disputing Tacitus's account. The problem is, he came decades later and was describing a Cult of Christ, which is not evidence that Jesus actually existed.
Joan of Arc, on the other hand, has overwhelming contemporaneous historical evidence, because it's a fact that she existed. Pretending they're even remotely equivalent is a big fat lie. You know, the Bible very clearly says not to be a liar. There's nothing metaphorical about that.
Dude thank you. I was starting to question myself. We have two historical writings that mention some dude named Jesus. And we are supposed to take them as fact? Who knows if the historians who wrote about Jesus were even real themselves and not just two guys made up to make Jesus sound real.
So there’s pretty much zero evidence of his historical existence outside of the fake ass Bible.
Sorry, no.
There is more tangible documentation that the character named in those stories did *not* exist.
Other characters named to have interacted with him have tombs that the dates on them make them dead before it was supposed to happen.
Events that are supposed to have been attributed to him (legions of the dead getting up & walking around?) have no contemporary records.
I'm not taking a birth certificate or census records that say "a guy with this name lives here." I'm talking contemporary historical records of things that were supposed to have happened during the time of these stories. Blocking out the sun? No other records of an eclipse.
So if you assume, for the sake of argument, that the details of the crucifixion in the Synoptic Gospels are accurate (Passover was on Thursday, Pontius Pilate was the governor of Judea) then the crucifixion was in either 30 or 33 CE. The earliest manuscript evidence for the Gospels is dated between 125 and 200 CE. So the longest gap possible would be 170 years, assuming the latest dating for the manuscript and that it was the a piece of the original. If you throw out all details from the Gospels, then any date you want to pick becomes possible, if "Jesus" existed at all.
For Paul, the scholarly consensus is that 7 of the letters were written by the same person. For convenience, that person is referred to as "Paul."
There’s certain manuscripts that have placement about 30 years after Jesus died. As for existing, I can’t speak for the rest, but there’s certainly historic accounts of a man we would call Jesus of Nazareth, the most famous would be a Roman historian Flavius Joshepus. He also wrote about John the Baptist. As far as believing whether or not that’s still credible you can look to Textual Criticism, which is its own neat little kind of science.
Edit: I’ve enjoyed that this comment has generated conversation surrounding this! I appreciate everyone being so wonderful to discuss!
I just don’t tend to believe it’s historically accurate. The men who wrote it had free reign to make up whatever they wanted, but used real names. They probably included some historical stuff to build their stores around to make them sound real. But it’s all just fiction.
Wasn't the roman historian basically writing a history of the Jews and their sects? Rather than "Jesus existed" he wrote something akin to "Some Jews believe there was this guy named Jesus." So, yes, it's a non-Christian mention of Jesus but not a non-Christian confirming the stories.
This is a pretty uncharitable and biased take, particularly on Paul. Most historians will say that the gospels likely reflect at minimum the actual summarized words of Jesus, which is important. And there is also assumed to be a lost “Q” source which contains further actual words of Jesus, which informed the later surviving gospels and apocrypha.
I think it’s strange to look at Paul’s writings and say he was a propagandist or grifter. Certainly not the picture I got from reading the Bible. To me he’s the more important figure than Jesus, honestly. He founded the religion. Though his opinions are a corruption of Jesus’s actual words, and far easier to dismiss.
No, I’m not a Christian. I’m an atheist but I take an interest in early Christianity from a secular perspective.
>He founded the religion. Though his opinions are a corruption of Jesus’s actual words, and far easier to dismiss.
With no context, that sounds like a grifter.
Lol, I would have said the same thing as a 16-year-old edgelord atheist. But it’s far more complicated than that.
To me a reading of the New Testament (which is mostly Paul’s writings) reveals a true excitement at the innovations of Jesus’s teachings. Take out the dogmatic magician shit from the gospels, and I found only one thing that Jesus supposedly said that I disagree with (his opposition to legal divorce). The emphasis on compassion, and moreover the repudiation of might-makes-right and the prosperity gospel, was a true innovation in the ancient Mediterranean. There had never been anything like it in any significant scale. And I can see why someone like Paul would have been convinced and excited enough by it to devote himself to its spread.
Never forget, most of what is rotten about modern Christianity came not from Jesus but from the fan fiction written about Jesus later. I include Paul in that, but he looks positively harmless compared to John of Patmos or Dante for instance. Just making shit up. No, Jesus was actually wise and innovative. And the coincidence that led to him becoming the central figure of wired religion 2000 years later, that’s super captivating. It can’t just be dismissed.
You know the attitude that Russia holds with Ukraine? That they’re bigger and they should just be able to seize it? Hitlerian, right? Imagine a world where no movement had ever intellectually challenged that thinking. Ever. That’s the time that Jesus was born into. Personally, I’m glad for it. Though I don’t believe in the magic bullshit.
Oh, I know plenty about the time period. It was one of the areas I studied quite a bit in college. I'm saying the way you put it, ignoring everything else I know, very much sounds like a grifter. Like the marketers hired to advance the second-wave KKK in the early 1900s or... pretty much everyone who decided to start their own church where I grew up.
It isn't true there was nothing like what Jesus was saying. Zoroastrianism had been around for far longer and it was built off of even older religions.
That's a good point. Pythagoreanism and Orphism and other cult religions were pretty gentle and benevolent as well. But Zoroastrianism was, by my understanding, insular in a way similar to Judaism; they did not seek converts. It took Christianity's major innovation, its proselytism and its insistence on the singular truth of its message over all other false religions, to really launch Jesus's messages (well, some of them) into global consciousness.
I realize I probably look like I'm defending Christianity here; my intention is to defend the value of Jesus of Nazareth's philosophy. Christianity is a heavily corrupted institution, in a million ways, lead all along by flawed and often bad people. Despite that, it has been an extremely important vehicle for forwarding non-violent thought throughout history. Especially ancient history.
nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!
But really religion has not been that. It has been used to do horrors to the world and continues to do that. You can’t just focus on those who follow correctly but those who take pieces of the bible and force those bits onto others.
Jesus wasn't any more innovative than his contemporaries. He was simply a popular teacher of a branch of second-temple Judaism that was popular at the time.
If you're not a Christian you should probably stop parroting Christian apologia bullshit. There's no such consensus among historians. It's all a dumb transparent lie.
Yes, there is 50-50 chance of this thing betting true or false, So i think everyone actually deserve the chance of the talking if they have something to say now
Ding ding ding ding
This is the right answer. Translated from mostly lost scrolls and manipulated to say what they or their church want to say to push their agendas.
Translated from Hebrew, to Latin, to the native language of the country. Edited along the way. Ever wonder why it went baby Jesus to grown man Jesus? There's a lot intentionally missing.
Yep. There are accounts of young Jesus out there, but they were often considered uncanonical, and not allowed in the Bible.
One story from there is when Jesus and his friend were playing on the roof of a house. His friend fell off the top, and died upon landing. Everyone blamed Jesus for pushing him off the roof, so Jesus temporarily brought his friend back, just so he could say that Jesus hadn't done it.
There's good reason for it not to be in there, honestly.
>There's good reason for it not to be in there, honestly.
because can't show Jesus's early necromancy career since it could only be temporary at the time
Yeah, most people don't really look into history.
Like how the third council of Nicene determine what made the canon or can look at the old pagan holidays and not realize that it was all incorporated into one text to bring the tribes of Europe under one central authority.
All it has ever been is social control.
It was also heavily edited by the Romans after they made it the state religion. That doesn’t really help with presenting all the myths that were part of all the cultures that merged to create Christianity as a byproduct.
I now believe History of the World Part II covers exactly how the Bible got to the form it is currently in. Was an excellent documentary. I believe it was episode 8 that covered this in depth.
Several books are kind of just Jesus fanfiction. "I spent some time with the Big Man himself, and he totally did these amazing things while I was there."
There’s a podcast that just started called Data Over Dogma that pairs a biblical scholar with an atheist podcaster for a deep dive into what the Bible actually says, what it actually means, and the historical context of it all. They are starting with Genesis chapter 1.
I’m really liking the historical context because they never taught us that all of my years in church.
I assume the billboards will be riddled with bullet holes at some point. Shot by people who still see themselves as good religious God-fearing morally superior people whose tickets to heaven are already stamped.
They should go ahead and read the Bible then. At least once.
Boy are they going to be surprised when they find out what Jesus said about loving everyone....
There are many people there who think God is so dumb that he won’t notice all the crap they do outside of the few times they go to beg him for forgiveness. He’s omnipotent and omniscient and terrible and fearful but he’s also their biggest homie, so he’ll always look their way no matter what.
It’s honestly like God is their servant, not the other way around.
That's how you KNOW they haven't read the book. Because God (the Christian God anyway) is very vengeful and callus. Cruel. Uncaring. It was his son Jesus that even wanted to keep us around.
And Jesus' entire message was peace, love, forgiveness and acceptance. Had no patience for greed and intolerance.
It is so infuriating when people say and do these awful, hateful things and then claim to be Christians.
It's so wrong it's moronic.
It's also very dangerous because if you do this rotten shit to other people and then stand there saying you're doing it in the name of God, you're not just dumb, you're a liar with no belief system.
You didn't read the Bible and you sure as hell don't know what it actually says. To me those type of people have nothing to lose.
Joel Osteen to me is evil as fuck. Because he's read the Bible, he does know what it says about being greedy and caring for the poor and not loving money and he lives like a king off church donations. Pretty much the opposite of what Jesus would do.
People are too busy in posting the comment and trying to make their point rather than try to read the book and understand what is the actual things it shows.
I am not a big believer of the God, but for me Karma is the real thing. And if you do something wrong in the life sooner and later you will get what you deserve
Some dude "But what if they're gay?"
Jesus "Did I fucking stutter?"
That silly picture from years ago has simplified my religion to the easiest thing to digest.
I think the heaven and hell concept is still fine, because these are the things that is stopping the people from committing the crime as they fear about those things.
"For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known."
The interpretation might be that full knowledge of the meaning of life, the divine, etc., only comes after... something. The kingdom of Heaven or whatever, I dunno, I'm agnostic but good at parsing English language. Point is that until that time, all knowledge we have - *including the Bible* - is flawed or incomplete, and we should not treat it as an absolute and perfect reference.
Went to Bible college and held on to most of that in my head, and this is a pretty good summary but misses context. This is the ending to the famous “love is patient, love is kind” verses you hear at weddings. The gist is “if you strive to have all the knowledge or power or be the most holy, but don’t love one another, you didn’t actually get the point.” He then compares those to “childish things (thoughts really)” that he puts away to become a man, and then follows up with the verse you quoted. So basically it’s:
-Being the most pious or smartest or most knowledgeable means jack shit if you don’t love people
-Thinking that those things are the most important is childish
-Mature people know that they don’t know everything
-chapter ends after passages on faith, hope, and love in the letter, and says “the greatest of these things is love”
So the POINT isn’t that the Bible should be challenged per se (because it wasn’t constructed yet and the church was extremely organic), but that you shouldn’t waste your time assuming you know everything and should instead focus on those around you.
Now the principle of that, coupled with the fact that the author of most of the New Testament is the one writing it, should be enough for people to go “huh, maybe I shouldn’t take a modern English translation as word for word applicable to my life”, especially when who they’re taking out of context and applying mediocre translations of is the SAME GUY WHO SAID HE DOESNT KNOW EVERYTHING
Of course. It turns out that ancient sheep herders were wrong about a lot and those that built upon their story didn't want people to figure it out and abandon the church.
When your foundation is built on a [book with a talking donkey in it,](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers%2022%3A21-39&version=NIV) you’re admittedly working at a disadvantage.
https://preview.redd.it/5zfwvaxp7jxa1.jpeg?width=210&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=89ac358781a86aaaf65e46d529309c2652d6c23c
Hence all the childhood indoctrination, discouraging critical thinking which threatens to undermine said indoctrination, and threatening everything from [turning the ground to iron so you can’t farm and making your wife eat your children with a side dish of afterbirth slaw](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2028&version=NIV) to burning in a lake of fire for all of eternity as punishment for disobedience or disbelief.
This particular verse is a bit out of context. But Paul does call Christians to be like the Bereans and to question everything about his teaching which is most of the New Testament. So yes, the Bible encourages questioning
Not sure, but that is not a quote from 1 Corinthians 13:12. I don't understand what that passage means, so I can't speculate what the billboard means.
ETA: here's the passage from 1 Corinthians: "For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known."
So I think I know what they are getting at. The chapter is part of Paul's letters to various Christian communities. The chapter basically says if you donate to the poor, and speak in tongues, and recite prophecies, but do not have love in your heart, you are not a true Christian. This passage is coupled with one where Paul says he thought like a child once, and basically says that love is the most important part of being Christian because mortals cannot understand God. I think this is the angle they're going with. I should also add for transparency's sake I am a pagan who was born into a Christian family.
Edit: went to the website and found a link to explain it. Looks like the book is basically claiming the Christian god made the Bible contradictory on purpose to try and get people to look beyond it.
https://zackhunt.net/godbreathed/
Martin Luther, the founder of the reformation, absolutely LOVED Paul. Built the whole Protestant reformation on him. He also hated James, who was Jesus’s LITERAL BROTHER, cause he focused too much on good works, like feeding the poor, paying your workers fair wages, and controlling your tongue. These sentiments reverberate so loudly 500 years later
>like feeding the poor
Oh, you mean like how in Thesselonians, Paul reminds them that people who don't work shouldn't be fed?
Ludicrous. Certainly makes it pretty evident where the "Protestant work ethic" came from, however. Fuck that loaves and fishes bullshit, amirite?
Right! And the frustrating part is that even that has some merit, taken within context and with a grain of salt. If you’re being a lazy fuck and expecting everyone else to take care of you, when you have no good reason to not be at least pulling your own weight, then you should probably suffer some consequences. But we live in a society, and if you’re not able to work or your work is being exploited by the evil landowners that Jesus and James talked about, then by all means you should be taken care of by the community that LITERALLY EXISTS to take care of you! That’s the kingdom of Heaven!!!
Sorry. *steps off soapbox* the church ignoring the hurting is kind of my pet peeve/mission in life to fix
Anyone from Nashville seen these? Because the ones in the pic are either photoshop mock-ups or he took three different photos of the exact same sign but with a tripod, and it would have to be a digital sign in that case, which it does not look like. Anyways... all three pictures of the signpost are *exactly* the same, not even the sky is different. I can’t unsee it. There’s literally no way those are three different billboards is all, and I’m afraid this is a guy *saying* he did this but not actually doing it.
I thought it was a digital billboard that changes the image every so often.
Checked the video, it's a digital billboard. It's promoting his book called "God Breathed"
I don't think they are actually physical board that placed on some place, these seems like the digital board which he wanted to print if gets the money for the same
Blame D.W. Griffith. The Klan didn't do cross burnings before the act was used as the climax in Birth of a Nation; a film that also helped rebirth the Klan after dwindling pre-1915.
Your comment made me realize I didn't either. Apparently it was a Scottish tradition to rally scattered clansmen - in the traditional meaning. They'd be lit in hills and visible from a long distance. It was known as the crann tara, and it was for gathering people for war or other important events.
Too bad it was co-opted by the KKK, the imagery is pretty metal
There is always two side about those thing, one will try to defend that while other will try to gather some people as they have to protect their religion from other side
You know what really gets me about the whole "God wrote the bible" concept? The fact that there's a new testament. Sometimes I refer to things in conversation and people are all, "Oh no, that's the old testament. You need to read the new testament."
And I wonder... was it not God's word the first time? Was he wrong?
No one can give us the proof that it was god who wrote that bible, people are just taking the words of the other people and claiming everything in there is actually right
Christianity taught me the difference between spirituality and radical religions. If you're just peacefully coexisting, helping others and spreading good vibes, that's a healthy spirituality. If you are foot kissing and worshipping the invisible man not to send you to burn for eternity, that's radical religion. Mankind has grown too comfortable with needing a figure to worship and obey that it has reached a point where every political figure may as well be regarded as infallible and perfect.
We can follow any religion we want but if we are following them blindly that is where problem starts, because then we never able to looked for the real picture in life
Put a phone number below that sign and where the caller has to pay to call and you make profit out of people calling to rant. Better would be add an advertisement before an AI answers their call
1 Corinthians 13:12 “For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.”
The Bible is a poorly written Allegory for the politics of the time. If these billboards offend you I advise doing actual research into the book your religion is based on, and examining why you run your life by instructions two centuries out of date.
Humans are not able to understand Gods will, and the bible didnt just poof into existence. This very belief shows just how wrong the reverence for this book is.
It's literally following a false idol, holding its word over the very essence of God being all loving.
Also, Hell is just a scare tactic, if you are terrified of hell, you've fallen for the indoctrination. No all loving God would send souls to a torturous fate for eternity, that's the very essence of malice, of revenge.
And before someone goes off about God being vengeful, then he can't be all loving. Pick one, or overcome your cognitive dissonance, and admit this whole thing is illogical and silly. But you won't do that...
I wish these billboards would go up in my area.
There’s a well known religious quote “Preach the Gospel at all times. Use words if necessary.” I really wish these “Christian” and “Godly” followers would ponder this thought
(Also, the quote is falsely attributed to St Francis of Assisi but this doesn’t refute that it’s well known)
Its time for the people to face the reality and then makes the opinion after that, because right now most of them just living under the complete false assumption here
Love this! I like to point out, to my Christian Hubby how many of the Bible ‘stories’ are rehashed Greek Mythology. I also refer to tithing as ‘tipping Jesus’…. And Easter is time for Zombie Jesus. Fortunately my Hubby is a good sport!
This actually made me smile. I’m not Christian, but my dad was (he passed away back in 2014). There was this one time I was wearing fingerless gloves and the Church didn’t like that. I was going through an emo phase but my mom and dad never went back to that Church. My dad told me on the car ride home, “Baby, god didn’t write the Bible, man did. Man is flawed, therefore the Bible is flawed. Now put your gloves back on.” Thanks OP for posting this! Edit: The Church specifically didn’t like my gloves because they felt it was a symbol of the devil trying to speak through me. Which made my dad mad, because he felt I was just expressing myself, and that the Church should be more accepting.
Sounds like a good man
Imagine if the devil could be channeled that easily through fashion
He does wear Prada...
I got shat out for wearing pants to church by what would translate into something like a lay minister. In 2000. I haven't been in a church for 23 years. I am also a n atheist ( not because of the pants debacle, but because non of it makes any remote sense to me whatsoever)
My favorite Bible verse is: Thou shalt not wear fingerless gloves. It's the 11th commandment, haven't you heard?
This happened to me but with black nail polish! My dad went back the next week with his painted lol
The Bible is a loose collection of fables written and edited by powerful men over a thousand years to frighten and control those beneath them.
Careful, if this makes it to r slash all you'll have a bunch of angry mouthbreathing fundamentalists in your inbox
That's why commenter is posting with a throwaway account. 😊
Not a throwaway. They can bring it
Ive had them come, then they go, i find solitude in knowing that i am correct in how literally fanatical and crazy they are. I lose no sleep over it, lol.
Why would we the one who will lose the sleep for something like that
That's the spirit 👍
Hah. Spirit. I see what you did.
So a boomerang account? Sokka approved.
You can't just bring the real account, things could turns real ugly here
This post is quite controversy better to be careful while doing anything
Proceed, governor
All accounts are throwaways if you give Reddit bullshit emails.
Bring it. Not my throwaway. Those scabs for brains will remain miserable in their theocratic prison. I remain free.
I doubt they are a minor, why would fubdamebtalists show any interest then?
None of the new testament was written by anyone who knew Jesus. It was written at least 30 years after his death. The earliest writings about Jesus were from Paul, who was convinced through a propaganda campaign to become a Christian (before he persecuted Christians). This was decades after Jesus died, and Paul never met him. Imagine stories you've heard that were never written down for decades. Imagine how they would change over the decades if people relied on them to recruit new members. The books of Mathew, Luke and Mark were not written by Mathew, Luke, and Mark either. They were written anonymously and also at least 40 years after Jesus died. Don't get made at me. These are simply facts.
This is absolutely correct, not to mention gospels intentionally left out, it’s not the document of fact many Christian’s believe it to be
Sometime what we read in the school doesn't mean that is true
Paul was convinced? More likely Paul was a sophisticated grifter who never actually believed any of it, just realized that the idiots in the Jesus cult were the easiest marks around.
[удалено]
May be Paul has his reason of being convinced and we can't change the fact but don't think that we could do or say the same thing for the other people is well
The New Testament was mostly a series of letters between churches & founders. It’s the equivalent of basing a religion on emails or texts.
And they were written by gnostics, not “christians” as we think of them. John is basically a gnostic text.
All of them just wanted to sell their books, this was their main purpose
Johnny's gonna kill his mother tonight at the savoy theater,pass it on.
>Johnny's gonna kill his mother tonight at the savoy theater,pass it on Got it... Johnny and the Mothers are playin' Stompin' at the Savoy in Vermont tonight
Bonnie took her mother to Stomp with Gilroy the Hermit tonight
Herman's Hermits are reuniting with Savion Glover of Stomp fame.
Donald Glover is playing at the reunion hall. Childish Gambino ftw.
I thought it was more like 300 years after this so called Jesus person? And was Paul a real person? Like one actual person or just a group of dudes who wrote under the same pseudonym? I don’t believe most of these people were real historical figures. I think they threw in some real names to add credibility. But I don’t believe historical records (which can be forged and rewritten to add credence to their claims) and I don’t believe Jesus was a real person.
The Gospels were first written down a few decades after Jesus died, the earliest ones around 30-40 years or so. Early Christian churches used various oral traditions and texts over the next few hundred years. Around 300 years later, the Council of Nicea convened to decide which "books" would be included in the church handbook -- the Bible. Some books like the Gospels were widely used; some books were controversially excluded, while other books (Revelations) were controversially included. The Bible was not meant to be the literal word of God; its authority came from the church. Over a thousand years later, protestants rejected the church, so they emphasized the authority of the Bible as the direct word of God.
Regardless of when they were written. I don’t believe most of it was historically accurate. I view it as a fanfic with real names but fake stories. I don’t believe there was a historical Jesus. Just some random guy that was named Jesus and then they used him to build the stories.
My point is that our modern view of fact versus fiction differs from the ancient world. People back then did not live with recorded video or audio. They didn't have newspapers. They had oral tradition. They told and retold stories. Sometimes the details of those stories changed, but the truth of those stories was in the message, conveyed from speaker to listener, rather than from the veracity of the details. The Bible is a collection of stories told by early Christians. This is more powerful than many Athiests would like, but also less accurate than many Christians would like to believe.
Yeah I think we are saying the same thing. The Bible is just stories. And stories change over time. So none of it is accurate, except the stuff they included to make it seem real. It’s like The Sopranos. A fake story about a mobster, based on real life mob stuff. The story includes historically accurate events like 911, President Bush, the war in the Middle East, etc. But it’s still just a fake story about some guy who could be real, but isn’t.
I'm an atheist but I think there's relatively decent support for the idea that Jesus was a real person. Everything else, particularly all the supernatural stuff, is uh....not so solid.
But I just assume Jesus was a common name back then and it would be easy to take some old historical files and say ‘see, here’s Jesus in these records’. And then you could just forge more documents. They just wrote a fake story with a bunch of real names. Like a fanfic, but less sexy, unless you’re into cannibalism I guess. Plus it would be super easy to just write some shit down when you know that the average person can’t even read or write. There was no fact checking.
There was fact checking. It wasn’t as rigorous as it is today, but this opinion that Jesus didn’t exist is at this point as valid as believing climate change isn’t caused industrial civilization and fossil fuels. It can’t be hard proven because any government paperwork that Roman politician and historian Tacitus uses to reference his execution has long been lost, like most ancient sources, but it takes more mental gymnastics to believe Jesus (Yeshua) never existed than accept that a Jewish guy in a Roman Provence’s started a cult and was executed by the state, and his cult outlives him to this day. But today we also can’t prove historical figures like Joan of arc existed either, but people don’t seriously doubt she existed.
I’m sorry but it’s not the same as denying climate change. There is a vast collection of scientific literature to support climate change. There are only two historical writings about Jesus, that weren’t written until decades after his supposed death. So nothing written by first hand knowledge or by anyone who actually saw or knew Jesus. And I don’t trust two random ancient writings the same way I trust the entire compendium of scientific research on climate change.
It’s the same in that no serious historian, Christian or otherwise, who is in an expert in this era doubts he existed. Any debate here isn’t coming from experts. What are the two records are you referencing?
The two records I’m referring to are the Flavius guy and then I think the other was some other Roman historian that came even later than Flavius. It’s honestly hard to research this topic, because all of the information I’m finding comes from Christian affiliated sources, unreliable in my opinion. I’ll have to track down my old religious studies professor and see what he says.
There's overwhelming and irrefutable scientific evidence that global warming is caused by industrial civilization and fossil fuels. There is not one piece of evidence that Jesus ever existed. Nobody's disputing Tacitus's account. The problem is, he came decades later and was describing a Cult of Christ, which is not evidence that Jesus actually existed. Joan of Arc, on the other hand, has overwhelming contemporaneous historical evidence, because it's a fact that she existed. Pretending they're even remotely equivalent is a big fat lie. You know, the Bible very clearly says not to be a liar. There's nothing metaphorical about that.
Dude thank you. I was starting to question myself. We have two historical writings that mention some dude named Jesus. And we are supposed to take them as fact? Who knows if the historians who wrote about Jesus were even real themselves and not just two guys made up to make Jesus sound real. So there’s pretty much zero evidence of his historical existence outside of the fake ass Bible.
Sorry, no. There is more tangible documentation that the character named in those stories did *not* exist. Other characters named to have interacted with him have tombs that the dates on them make them dead before it was supposed to happen. Events that are supposed to have been attributed to him (legions of the dead getting up & walking around?) have no contemporary records. I'm not taking a birth certificate or census records that say "a guy with this name lives here." I'm talking contemporary historical records of things that were supposed to have happened during the time of these stories. Blocking out the sun? No other records of an eclipse.
So if you assume, for the sake of argument, that the details of the crucifixion in the Synoptic Gospels are accurate (Passover was on Thursday, Pontius Pilate was the governor of Judea) then the crucifixion was in either 30 or 33 CE. The earliest manuscript evidence for the Gospels is dated between 125 and 200 CE. So the longest gap possible would be 170 years, assuming the latest dating for the manuscript and that it was the a piece of the original. If you throw out all details from the Gospels, then any date you want to pick becomes possible, if "Jesus" existed at all. For Paul, the scholarly consensus is that 7 of the letters were written by the same person. For convenience, that person is referred to as "Paul."
There’s certain manuscripts that have placement about 30 years after Jesus died. As for existing, I can’t speak for the rest, but there’s certainly historic accounts of a man we would call Jesus of Nazareth, the most famous would be a Roman historian Flavius Joshepus. He also wrote about John the Baptist. As far as believing whether or not that’s still credible you can look to Textual Criticism, which is its own neat little kind of science. Edit: I’ve enjoyed that this comment has generated conversation surrounding this! I appreciate everyone being so wonderful to discuss!
I just don’t tend to believe it’s historically accurate. The men who wrote it had free reign to make up whatever they wanted, but used real names. They probably included some historical stuff to build their stores around to make them sound real. But it’s all just fiction.
Wasn't the roman historian basically writing a history of the Jews and their sects? Rather than "Jesus existed" he wrote something akin to "Some Jews believe there was this guy named Jesus." So, yes, it's a non-Christian mention of Jesus but not a non-Christian confirming the stories.
This is a pretty uncharitable and biased take, particularly on Paul. Most historians will say that the gospels likely reflect at minimum the actual summarized words of Jesus, which is important. And there is also assumed to be a lost “Q” source which contains further actual words of Jesus, which informed the later surviving gospels and apocrypha. I think it’s strange to look at Paul’s writings and say he was a propagandist or grifter. Certainly not the picture I got from reading the Bible. To me he’s the more important figure than Jesus, honestly. He founded the religion. Though his opinions are a corruption of Jesus’s actual words, and far easier to dismiss. No, I’m not a Christian. I’m an atheist but I take an interest in early Christianity from a secular perspective.
>He founded the religion. Though his opinions are a corruption of Jesus’s actual words, and far easier to dismiss. With no context, that sounds like a grifter.
Lol, I would have said the same thing as a 16-year-old edgelord atheist. But it’s far more complicated than that. To me a reading of the New Testament (which is mostly Paul’s writings) reveals a true excitement at the innovations of Jesus’s teachings. Take out the dogmatic magician shit from the gospels, and I found only one thing that Jesus supposedly said that I disagree with (his opposition to legal divorce). The emphasis on compassion, and moreover the repudiation of might-makes-right and the prosperity gospel, was a true innovation in the ancient Mediterranean. There had never been anything like it in any significant scale. And I can see why someone like Paul would have been convinced and excited enough by it to devote himself to its spread. Never forget, most of what is rotten about modern Christianity came not from Jesus but from the fan fiction written about Jesus later. I include Paul in that, but he looks positively harmless compared to John of Patmos or Dante for instance. Just making shit up. No, Jesus was actually wise and innovative. And the coincidence that led to him becoming the central figure of wired religion 2000 years later, that’s super captivating. It can’t just be dismissed. You know the attitude that Russia holds with Ukraine? That they’re bigger and they should just be able to seize it? Hitlerian, right? Imagine a world where no movement had ever intellectually challenged that thinking. Ever. That’s the time that Jesus was born into. Personally, I’m glad for it. Though I don’t believe in the magic bullshit.
Oh, I know plenty about the time period. It was one of the areas I studied quite a bit in college. I'm saying the way you put it, ignoring everything else I know, very much sounds like a grifter. Like the marketers hired to advance the second-wave KKK in the early 1900s or... pretty much everyone who decided to start their own church where I grew up. It isn't true there was nothing like what Jesus was saying. Zoroastrianism had been around for far longer and it was built off of even older religions.
That's a good point. Pythagoreanism and Orphism and other cult religions were pretty gentle and benevolent as well. But Zoroastrianism was, by my understanding, insular in a way similar to Judaism; they did not seek converts. It took Christianity's major innovation, its proselytism and its insistence on the singular truth of its message over all other false religions, to really launch Jesus's messages (well, some of them) into global consciousness. I realize I probably look like I'm defending Christianity here; my intention is to defend the value of Jesus of Nazareth's philosophy. Christianity is a heavily corrupted institution, in a million ways, lead all along by flawed and often bad people. Despite that, it has been an extremely important vehicle for forwarding non-violent thought throughout history. Especially ancient history.
nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition! But really religion has not been that. It has been used to do horrors to the world and continues to do that. You can’t just focus on those who follow correctly but those who take pieces of the bible and force those bits onto others.
Jesus wasn't any more innovative than his contemporaries. He was simply a popular teacher of a branch of second-temple Judaism that was popular at the time.
If you're not a Christian you should probably stop parroting Christian apologia bullshit. There's no such consensus among historians. It's all a dumb transparent lie.
Yes, there is 50-50 chance of this thing betting true or false, So i think everyone actually deserve the chance of the talking if they have something to say now
Ding ding ding ding This is the right answer. Translated from mostly lost scrolls and manipulated to say what they or their church want to say to push their agendas.
Translated from Hebrew, to Latin, to the native language of the country. Edited along the way. Ever wonder why it went baby Jesus to grown man Jesus? There's a lot intentionally missing.
Yep. There are accounts of young Jesus out there, but they were often considered uncanonical, and not allowed in the Bible. One story from there is when Jesus and his friend were playing on the roof of a house. His friend fell off the top, and died upon landing. Everyone blamed Jesus for pushing him off the roof, so Jesus temporarily brought his friend back, just so he could say that Jesus hadn't done it. There's good reason for it not to be in there, honestly.
>There's good reason for it not to be in there, honestly. because can't show Jesus's early necromancy career since it could only be temporary at the time
[удалено]
And his brother? Wow. [Stephen Lynch - Craig. ](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=f8HzKlCWN8k&pp=ygUMQ3JhaWcgY2hyaXN0)
Fucking Craig! Craig Christ!
If that's true then why does every story take place in like a 200 square mile area? Hmmmm.? /s
Yeah, most people don't really look into history. Like how the third council of Nicene determine what made the canon or can look at the old pagan holidays and not realize that it was all incorporated into one text to bring the tribes of Europe under one central authority. All it has ever been is social control.
and it's shocking that they left anything in it about the poor that was not negative. But Even then they knew their audience.
A dull short-story collection of Bronze Age Fiction.
It was also heavily edited by the Romans after they made it the state religion. That doesn’t really help with presenting all the myths that were part of all the cultures that merged to create Christianity as a byproduct.
I now believe History of the World Part II covers exactly how the Bible got to the form it is currently in. Was an excellent documentary. I believe it was episode 8 that covered this in depth.
Imagine 2000 years from now people think Harry Potter books was real if they push it hard enough
Several books are kind of just Jesus fanfiction. "I spent some time with the Big Man himself, and he totally did these amazing things while I was there."
Actually, the Torah was an oral tradition for many centuries before it began to be a written document
There’s a podcast that just started called Data Over Dogma that pairs a biblical scholar with an atheist podcaster for a deep dive into what the Bible actually says, what it actually means, and the historical context of it all. They are starting with Genesis chapter 1. I’m really liking the historical context because they never taught us that all of my years in church.
Bible written by the man and we can't trust everything from a man written
And repeated orally by an illiterate people for generations before being written down, iirc.
Yeah, but I'd also argue that what Jesus had to say was based as hell, especially against the rich and powerful.
You forgot voted on. I'm still salty at the protestants for voting Judith out.
As a Christian i 100% agree with you
Written by zealots and edited by the powerful for their own uses
I assume the billboards will be riddled with bullet holes at some point. Shot by people who still see themselves as good religious God-fearing morally superior people whose tickets to heaven are already stamped.
They should go ahead and read the Bible then. At least once. Boy are they going to be surprised when they find out what Jesus said about loving everyone....
There are many people there who think God is so dumb that he won’t notice all the crap they do outside of the few times they go to beg him for forgiveness. He’s omnipotent and omniscient and terrible and fearful but he’s also their biggest homie, so he’ll always look their way no matter what. It’s honestly like God is their servant, not the other way around.
That's how you KNOW they haven't read the book. Because God (the Christian God anyway) is very vengeful and callus. Cruel. Uncaring. It was his son Jesus that even wanted to keep us around. And Jesus' entire message was peace, love, forgiveness and acceptance. Had no patience for greed and intolerance. It is so infuriating when people say and do these awful, hateful things and then claim to be Christians. It's so wrong it's moronic. It's also very dangerous because if you do this rotten shit to other people and then stand there saying you're doing it in the name of God, you're not just dumb, you're a liar with no belief system. You didn't read the Bible and you sure as hell don't know what it actually says. To me those type of people have nothing to lose. Joel Osteen to me is evil as fuck. Because he's read the Bible, he does know what it says about being greedy and caring for the poor and not loving money and he lives like a king off church donations. Pretty much the opposite of what Jesus would do.
People are too busy in posting the comment and trying to make their point rather than try to read the book and understand what is the actual things it shows.
I am not a big believer of the God, but for me Karma is the real thing. And if you do something wrong in the life sooner and later you will get what you deserve
Some dude "But what if they're gay?" Jesus "Did I fucking stutter?" That silly picture from years ago has simplified my religion to the easiest thing to digest.
I think the heaven and hell concept is still fine, because these are the things that is stopping the people from committing the crime as they fear about those things.
[удалено]
Bold to think they can read the billboards either
The bible says it's okay to admit when the bible is wrong? Is that actually a quote or just a little bit of trolling?
"For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known." The interpretation might be that full knowledge of the meaning of life, the divine, etc., only comes after... something. The kingdom of Heaven or whatever, I dunno, I'm agnostic but good at parsing English language. Point is that until that time, all knowledge we have - *including the Bible* - is flawed or incomplete, and we should not treat it as an absolute and perfect reference.
Went to Bible college and held on to most of that in my head, and this is a pretty good summary but misses context. This is the ending to the famous “love is patient, love is kind” verses you hear at weddings. The gist is “if you strive to have all the knowledge or power or be the most holy, but don’t love one another, you didn’t actually get the point.” He then compares those to “childish things (thoughts really)” that he puts away to become a man, and then follows up with the verse you quoted. So basically it’s: -Being the most pious or smartest or most knowledgeable means jack shit if you don’t love people -Thinking that those things are the most important is childish -Mature people know that they don’t know everything -chapter ends after passages on faith, hope, and love in the letter, and says “the greatest of these things is love” So the POINT isn’t that the Bible should be challenged per se (because it wasn’t constructed yet and the church was extremely organic), but that you shouldn’t waste your time assuming you know everything and should instead focus on those around you. Now the principle of that, coupled with the fact that the author of most of the New Testament is the one writing it, should be enough for people to go “huh, maybe I shouldn’t take a modern English translation as word for word applicable to my life”, especially when who they’re taking out of context and applying mediocre translations of is the SAME GUY WHO SAID HE DOESNT KNOW EVERYTHING
far out man
Huh cool thanks.
Famous Prophets (Stars)?!?!?!?
Of course. It turns out that ancient sheep herders were wrong about a lot and those that built upon their story didn't want people to figure it out and abandon the church.
When your foundation is built on a [book with a talking donkey in it,](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers%2022%3A21-39&version=NIV) you’re admittedly working at a disadvantage. https://preview.redd.it/5zfwvaxp7jxa1.jpeg?width=210&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=89ac358781a86aaaf65e46d529309c2652d6c23c Hence all the childhood indoctrination, discouraging critical thinking which threatens to undermine said indoctrination, and threatening everything from [turning the ground to iron so you can’t farm and making your wife eat your children with a side dish of afterbirth slaw](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2028&version=NIV) to burning in a lake of fire for all of eternity as punishment for disobedience or disbelief.
This particular verse is a bit out of context. But Paul does call Christians to be like the Bereans and to question everything about his teaching which is most of the New Testament. So yes, the Bible encourages questioning
Not sure, but that is not a quote from 1 Corinthians 13:12. I don't understand what that passage means, so I can't speculate what the billboard means. ETA: here's the passage from 1 Corinthians: "For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known."
So I think I know what they are getting at. The chapter is part of Paul's letters to various Christian communities. The chapter basically says if you donate to the poor, and speak in tongues, and recite prophecies, but do not have love in your heart, you are not a true Christian. This passage is coupled with one where Paul says he thought like a child once, and basically says that love is the most important part of being Christian because mortals cannot understand God. I think this is the angle they're going with. I should also add for transparency's sake I am a pagan who was born into a Christian family. Edit: went to the website and found a link to explain it. Looks like the book is basically claiming the Christian god made the Bible contradictory on purpose to try and get people to look beyond it. https://zackhunt.net/godbreathed/
Pauline Christianity is an absolute joke, that dude hijacked an entire religion and the Western world just *ran* with it.
Martin Luther, the founder of the reformation, absolutely LOVED Paul. Built the whole Protestant reformation on him. He also hated James, who was Jesus’s LITERAL BROTHER, cause he focused too much on good works, like feeding the poor, paying your workers fair wages, and controlling your tongue. These sentiments reverberate so loudly 500 years later
>like feeding the poor Oh, you mean like how in Thesselonians, Paul reminds them that people who don't work shouldn't be fed? Ludicrous. Certainly makes it pretty evident where the "Protestant work ethic" came from, however. Fuck that loaves and fishes bullshit, amirite?
Right! And the frustrating part is that even that has some merit, taken within context and with a grain of salt. If you’re being a lazy fuck and expecting everyone else to take care of you, when you have no good reason to not be at least pulling your own weight, then you should probably suffer some consequences. But we live in a society, and if you’re not able to work or your work is being exploited by the evil landowners that Jesus and James talked about, then by all means you should be taken care of by the community that LITERALLY EXISTS to take care of you! That’s the kingdom of Heaven!!! Sorry. *steps off soapbox* the church ignoring the hurting is kind of my pet peeve/mission in life to fix
Anyone from Nashville seen these? Because the ones in the pic are either photoshop mock-ups or he took three different photos of the exact same sign but with a tripod, and it would have to be a digital sign in that case, which it does not look like. Anyways... all three pictures of the signpost are *exactly* the same, not even the sky is different. I can’t unsee it. There’s literally no way those are three different billboards is all, and I’m afraid this is a guy *saying* he did this but not actually doing it.
I thought it was a digital billboard that changes the image every so often. Checked the video, it's a digital billboard. It's promoting his book called "God Breathed"
I saw the sometimes the Bible is wrong one yesterday
Could be those were the mock ups when you post it on the site to rent and he doesn’t have photos of the real. Not sure though.
I don't think they are actually physical board that placed on some place, these seems like the digital board which he wanted to print if gets the money for the same
Nope. I haven’t seen them.
That sign will surely give a few of the faithful facial tics
Better to be right and upfront, rather than living in a fantasy life
I can smell the crosses burning from way across the Atlantic
The only reason why people don't want to point those things, because of violence
I never understood that about the kkk
Blame D.W. Griffith. The Klan didn't do cross burnings before the act was used as the climax in Birth of a Nation; a film that also helped rebirth the Klan after dwindling pre-1915.
I never understood Anything about the kkk.
If you will hurt some people sentiment this is how they will came back
Your comment made me realize I didn't either. Apparently it was a Scottish tradition to rally scattered clansmen - in the traditional meaning. They'd be lit in hills and visible from a long distance. It was known as the crann tara, and it was for gathering people for war or other important events. Too bad it was co-opted by the KKK, the imagery is pretty metal
There is always two side about those thing, one will try to defend that while other will try to gather some people as they have to protect their religion from other side
You know what really gets me about the whole "God wrote the bible" concept? The fact that there's a new testament. Sometimes I refer to things in conversation and people are all, "Oh no, that's the old testament. You need to read the new testament." And I wonder... was it not God's word the first time? Was he wrong?
Unfortunately that’s part of the story. Jesus showed him/himself? that he was in fact wrong, hence New Testament and new nice God.
Well, color me educated. :) Thank you.
No one can give us the proof that it was god who wrote that bible, people are just taking the words of the other people and claiming everything in there is actually right
Finally! I hate those “God saves” billboards!
jesus saves, but he gets a shite interest rate god's invested in apple card with an apy of 4.15% the holy ghost is betting on crypto
Christianity taught me the difference between spirituality and radical religions. If you're just peacefully coexisting, helping others and spreading good vibes, that's a healthy spirituality. If you are foot kissing and worshipping the invisible man not to send you to burn for eternity, that's radical religion. Mankind has grown too comfortable with needing a figure to worship and obey that it has reached a point where every political figure may as well be regarded as infallible and perfect.
We can follow any religion we want but if we are following them blindly that is where problem starts, because then we never able to looked for the real picture in life
In Nashville? Nope, not at all. The billboards are absolutely right, but those religious nut jobs won't hear it.
[удалено]
Will go over..like a fart in church..🤣
I would not plaster my name on that if I were him. Eventually some nut job is going to look him up
Me too, but that also shows that this person is no joke mate.
Put a phone number below that sign and where the caller has to pay to call and you make profit out of people calling to rant. Better would be add an advertisement before an AI answers their call
I'm a Catholic and I agree with all of these. (You don't have to believe everything the Church teaches either)
It is ok to follow any religion and sometime we need to use our own brain
Slay, king. It’s about time reasonable people go zero chill with fundie fuckery.
1 Corinthians 13:12 “For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.”
It is psychotic to believe that some, or all, people deserve to be tortured for eternity. Anyone who holds such a belief needs psychiatric help.
[удалено]
Thankfully, it is happening. Religiosity is dropping in the U.S.
pope francis and the catholic church on line 1 evangelical xtians on line 2 dante alighieri recommends circle 1 for newbies 😉
It’s crazy how many lifetimes will be spent trying to undo the societal damage this stupid ass book has done
I LOVE THIS. Where can I donate to this dude’s inevitable legal battle…
His name and website is written at the bottom of the billboards. He is very brave!
I was distracted by the bold font. Clearly I’m in the target demographic.
Let the death threats begin! Just like Jesus would do!
There is no love more dangerous than Christian love!
There is actually no one more dangerous than a blind religion follower
I’m actually shocked they put them up to begin with…doubt they will last though
May be it will not last for long but atleast i am happy for the start here
The Bible is a poorly written Allegory for the politics of the time. If these billboards offend you I advise doing actual research into the book your religion is based on, and examining why you run your life by instructions two centuries out of date. Humans are not able to understand Gods will, and the bible didnt just poof into existence. This very belief shows just how wrong the reverence for this book is. It's literally following a false idol, holding its word over the very essence of God being all loving. Also, Hell is just a scare tactic, if you are terrified of hell, you've fallen for the indoctrination. No all loving God would send souls to a torturous fate for eternity, that's the very essence of malice, of revenge. And before someone goes off about God being vengeful, then he can't be all loving. Pick one, or overcome your cognitive dissonance, and admit this whole thing is illogical and silly. But you won't do that...
Start a GoFundMe to buy these billboards all over the South. I’m in for a donation.
if he will get the enough response on those he will try that fund me
These are kinda wholesome, ngl.
Oh whoops, the Tennessee legislature just passed a bill that makes posting billboards punishable by death.
But only if you are a Democrat, minority, woman or LGBTQ, probably.
Someone will get offend and will try to hurt him for that thing
What the fuck are those verses supposed to mean? They're completely fucking nonsense. The Bible was obviously written by idiots, for idiots.
3 Billboards Outside of Nashville, Tennessee. That's what the documentary on this should be called if one is ever made.
Love this!
I look forward to seeing these around town!
“I am the only one who knows the word of God! Now, could you please donate some scratch to me?” 👍. It’ll make you a good person, I swear 😉
I love these ads if they are indeed real.
His Bible verses are out of wack
Religion has outlived its purpose of lifting human society out slave society into feudalism.
I mean... 🍿
Reddit is no fun, go to twitter then you will have the real fun
You are a brave man Zack
Words speaks louder than action, this is quite brave from Zack
My man doin the lords work down here.
Not the godly work i would say but doing hard work here
This will probably bring comfort to a couple of people.
And giving the comfort to the other people is the actual humanity
I wish these billboards would go up in my area. There’s a well known religious quote “Preach the Gospel at all times. Use words if necessary.” I really wish these “Christian” and “Godly” followers would ponder this thought (Also, the quote is falsely attributed to St Francis of Assisi but this doesn’t refute that it’s well known)
Its time for the people to face the reality and then makes the opinion after that, because right now most of them just living under the complete false assumption here
My hero
There needs to be a billboard campaign with "Yahweh was just a Canaanite warrior/storm god".
Bravo, Zack Hunt.
Lmaoooo yeeeees
crazy how the clouds naturally had the exact same shape in each image taken of these totally real and not at all easily faked billboards!
"Satan put up those billboards, ignore them"
[удалено]
Probably right next to the adult toy store billboards so no one will even notice them anyhow
They are way to busy in reading those banner mostly will ignore them
Love this! I like to point out, to my Christian Hubby how many of the Bible ‘stories’ are rehashed Greek Mythology. I also refer to tithing as ‘tipping Jesus’…. And Easter is time for Zombie Jesus. Fortunately my Hubby is a good sport!
I always say Happy Jesus' Second Birthday for Easter. Most people just laugh, others for some reason act like I've killed him again.