1 Corinthians 2: 2: For I determined not

to know any thing among you, save Jesus

Christ, and him crucified.


Surah 4: 157: That they said in boast ‘we

killed Christ Isa, the son of Mary’…but

they killed him not, nor crucified him.


The Bible says that Jesus was crucified, Quran says that he was not crucified. There are controversies about Jesus, including one that he did not exist t all. Quran says he existed alright. What is the truth about him? Atheists who have Not been christians will want to know.

Views: 483

Replies to This Discussion

There are contradictions a plenty, even within the bible. I mean, Judas Iscariot either hanged himself or spilled his guts out in a field, depending on which version you read. The tomb after the cruci-fiction was either empty or it had one person in it or three, again, dependent on whom you listen to.

Expecting the bible or the quran to have any kind of historical integrity is to expect the truth from a habitual liar. Baby and bathwater - OUT!

If the series is like other fantasy/sci-fi series, he will have a son who comes back, with the same powers as his dad, only he will fall in love and fight a battle against the one who either killed his father or IS his father.

  So far we have the Torah(book1), New Testament(book2), Koran(book 3), Book of Mormon(kind of Book 4-but like in so many other series where you have that one book that kind of doesn't really fit into the main storyline but goes off on it's own to explore some other character).

  My guess is that book 5 or 6 will be divided into two parts and Satan will ultimately be revealed to be God himself, but he was hiding behind the whole "Satan" thing for some secret reason which will ultimately be some huge let-down.  (Oh wait!  The Yezhidis already have that one (the Mahaf-Res and al-Jilwah)-silly me, now I've spoiled the whole plot.  Oh, well Zarathustra already kind of let us in on the whole ending, anyway.

I'm an Atheist who has not been a christian and I couldn't care less one way or the other. I don't waste my time reading holy texts because it's useless garbage and not the way to enlightenment. Science and nature provide our means to understanding ourselves and the world.

I think there's value in reading them as literature, and as snapshots of a culture at a certain place and time, but as far as being historical documents, they are too biased to be of any use.

The Big Blue Frog

During the last 3-4 years, I have read the Indian epic Mahabharata and the Bhagvad Geeta, and I entirely endorse your view. It can be of help to know the past. I can say from my experiance that this reading gave me a lot for thinking and it has broadened my thinking. However, as philosophical or religious books, their value is zero to me.

Literature ? Those stories written in dead or stagnant languages by people of that time, then translated or interpreted into an absurd form of English, leaves you with a pile of nonsensical rubbish.

Curiosity is healthy but I have had my fill with a catholic education. Holy texts stink.

Napoleon Bonaparte

Your observations are limited in scope. Sanskrit is a beautiful language and has a vast store of knowledge. I love that language. What you say applies well for mythology and not for philosophy. The Bhagvad Geeta is all philosophy and no mythology. As an atheist, I know that philosophy is all imagination but after reading the Bhagvad Geeta, I came to know that although it's philosophy is also imagination, it also tells me that those of my ancestors who created this pholosophy were brilliant people and I can be proud of them for this reason.

Absolutely, my observations are limited in scope. I didn't even known about the beautiful language of Sanskrit and the Bhagvad Geeta and am grateful to you telling me. To be fair I was addressing the Big Blue Frog's comment on Monday which was about the koran and the bible.

The Gita is a beautifully written excuse for killing.  Krishna tells Arjuna that there are only two certainties to worry about: death and rebirth.  He is half right.  But since in the world of the Gita, rebirth is certain, as is the immortality of the soul, a mere man cannot really kill anything.  Except all of those thousands of bodies that would be hacked to pieces in the coming epic battle between the Pandavas and Pauravas (Who?).  It's claptrap that justifies violence.

In fairness to the Gita, you have to know the back-story (the Mahabharata) to get the whole picture. The Kauravas (also known as the Kurus) were of the same bloodline as the Pandavas (or Pandus), but the Kauravas had become corrupt, and had been spoiling for a fight. Reminded by Krishna that he was fighting his own family, Arjuna (of the Pandus) hesitates on the battlefield, and that's where most of the meat of Gita comes from.

In the long haul, though, both sides become corrupt during the battle, and while the Pandus ultimately win against the Kurus, it is a Pyrrhic victory.

Right On! Napoleon Bonaparte. Holy texts are useless garbage, unworthy of our mental attention. Let's move on already to THE REAL WORLD!

Sure Ruth. That's why I'm a member of your group. I can't see your picture.




Update Your Membership :



Nexus on Social Media:

© 2019   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: The Nexus Group.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service