The Atheist Blogger » jesus

Take That Jesus!

Adrian Hayter — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 15:36:08 +0000

So yesterday was a snow day, and all my lectures were canceled! I was originally planning to go to the Christian Union’s lecture on “why does God limit my sexuality?”, although I had a massive change of plans. Let me put it this way: the last time it snowed in my area was several years ago, and the last time it really snowed was about a decade ago. There was no possible way I would miss out on any snow time, and when the chance to have a snowball fight came up, I couldn’t turn it down.

We decided to walk up to Windsor Great Park, but as soon as we walked out the door we were pelting each other with snowballs. It was actually a really good place to fight, because the parked cars made for great cover, and were covered in snow to make ammunition. A few neighbourhood kids turned up, and we got into a fight with them. Unfortunately they didn’t know when enough was enough, and they started to follow us as we continued our walk. Two of their friends joined us, and started throwing snowballs at very high speeds and with remarkably good accuracy. One of them collided with my face, knocked my glasses off my nose, and was unbelievably painful. We managed to shake them off, and proceed to walk to a local pub we knew. On the way I noticed a small evangelical church with a big “Jesus” sign, and, with my friend Dan on camera duty, I proceeded to pelt it with snowballs.

Take that you non-existent deity!

Once we got to the pub, we decided not to go to Windsor Park after all, as the people we were planning on fighting with weren’t going, and we had already had a snowball fight. My full album of photos from the day is available as a public facebook album here. The last few photos are most certainly NSFW for various reasons, mainly because they are pictures of a giant snow sculpture of the male sexual organ I made for a bet. I’m quite annoyed since it was stolen last night, but I guess I’ll just have to make a better one when it snows again later this week.

Possibly Related Posts:

What The Bible Really Teaches About Hell

Adrian Hayter — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 16:00:22 +0000

A theist member of an atheist forum I help run wrote an essay-like topic that I thought I should share with people who read this blog. He has cleared me to post it on my blog, so here it is:

The English Word Hell

The old English word hell comes from helan, and means to cover or conceal. Similar words coming from the same root have a similar meaning.

Hill for example is a mound of dirt or stone that covers the level surface of earth. Hull is the covering of a nut or the covered part of a ship. Heal is the covering of a wound. Hall is a building space which is used to cover people or goods. Hole is an uncovering. Shell.

In the early days to hell potatoes meant to cover them, as to store them in a cellar or underground. To hel a house meant to cover a portion of it with tile. The term heling a house is still used in the New England portions of the United States.

At first the use of hell had no pagan meaning to it. It was simply used as the common grave of man. To go to hell in the old English language meant simply that one was dead and buried. It was in Germany and England that the word began to evolve into the pagan unscriptural meaning of eternal punishment.

Poor Translation

The original meaning of the word hell is not so much a poor translation of the Hebrew sheohl (English Transliteration sheol) and the Greek Haides (English transliteration hades), however, as the word has evolved into a pagan meaning the modern day translation of hell is misleading.

The Catholic Douay Version translates sheohl as hell 64 times and once as death. The King James Version translates sheohl 31 times as hell, 31 times as grave and 3 times as pit.

This is common in older translations as well, such as is used by the English Revised Version (1885) where sheohl is transliterated in many cases but most of the occurrences were translated as grave, or pit. Hell being used 14 times. The American Standard Version (1901) transliterated sheohl in all 65 occurrences and haides in all ten of its occurrences, though the Greek word Geenna (English Gehenna) is translated hell.

The Hebrew Sheohl

The Hebrew word sheohl is the unseen resting place of the dead. It is not to be mistaken for the Hebrew words for individual burial place ( qever – Judges 16:31 ), grave ( qevurah – Genesis 35:20 ), or individual tomb ( gadhish – Job 21:32 ) but rather the common grave of all mankind whatever the form of burial might be.

The Greek teaching of the immortality of the human soul and hell began to infiltrate Jewish teachings probably around the time of Alexander The Great. The Bible itself, however, is in stark contrast to the teachings of pagan origin regarding the soul, which is not immortal ( Ezekiel 18:4 ) and therefore can’t suffer forever in hell. The Bible also teaches that there is no consciousness in hell. ( Ecclesiastes 9:4-10 ).

Sheol corresponds with the Greek Haides, both being the unseen resting place of the dead. It is not a place of fire, but of darkness ( Job 10:21 ) a place of silence ( Psalm 115:17 ) rather than a place filled with tortured screams.

The Greek Haides

The Greek word Haides corresponds to the Hebrew Sheohl as is indicated by the apostle Peter’s reference to Psalm 16:10 at Acts 2:27-31 where Jesus had fulfilled David’s prophecy that Jesus would not be left in hell. Likewise Jesus himself said that like Jonah, he would spend three days in hell. ( Jonah 1:17 – Jonah 2:2 / Matthew 12:40 )

The Greek word Haides occurs 10 times in the Christian Greek scriptures. ( Matthew 11:23 / Matthew 16:18 / Luke 10:15 / Luke 16:23 / Acts 2:27 / Acts 2:31 / Revelation 1:18 / Revelation 6:8 / Revelation 20:13 / Revelation 20:14 ).

It means the unseen place. In ten of the occurrences of haides it is in reference to death. It is not to be confused with the Greek word for grave ( taphos ), tomb ( mnema ) or memorial tomb ( mnemeion ), but is rather the common resting place of the dead. The place of death.

Jesus also uses haides at Matthew 11:23 and Luke 10:15 in a figurative way to indicate the debasement of Capernaum compared to heaven.

Also see The Rich Man And Lazarus below.

The Greek Gehenna

Unlike the Hebrew sheohl and the Greek haides, there is really no excuse for mistaking the Greek Geenna (Hebrew Geh Hinnom – English Transliteration Gehenna) with the notion of any hell, either the old English word meaning covered or the pagan hell of today’s Christianity.

The Christian Greek Gehenna is a literal place – a valley that lies South and South-West of ancient Jerusalem. It is the modern day Wadi er-Rababi ( Ge Ben Hinnom ), a deep, narrow valley.

Today it is a peaceful and pleasant valley, unlike the surrounding dry and rocky terrain, and most certainly unlike the pagan / apostate Christian hell.

In the days of unfaithful Kings Manasseh and Ahaz idolatrous worship of the pagan god Baal was conducted in the place which was then known as Geh Hinnom, ( the valley of Hinnom ) including human sacrifices to fire. It is ironic that the pagan custom burning in fire would have so clearly infiltrated the Christian teachings, considering that this practice was a detestable thing to Jehovah God, and his prophets spoke of a time when this place would be turned into a defiled and desolate place. ( 2 Chronicles 28:1-3 / 2 Chronicles 33:1-6 / Jeremiah 7:31-32 / Jeremiah 32:35 ).

The prophecy was fulfilled in the days of faithful King Josiah, who had the place, especially the area known as Topeth polluted into a refuse heap. ( 2 Kings 23:10 )

So it was that in the days of Jesus and the early Christian congregations, that the valley was known as a literal place where the carcasses of criminals and animals were thrown, having no hope for resurrection. The refuse there was kept burning with sulphur, which is abundant in the area. When Jesus used Gehenna as a figurative – a symbolic reference to the spiritually dead the people in the area knew what he was talking about.

The Greek Tartarus

The Greek word Tartarus is found only once in scripture, at 2 Peter 2:4. It is often mistranslated as hell. Tartarus in the Christian Greek scriptures refers to a condition of debasement, unlike the pre-Christian pagan tartarus ( Homer’s Iliad ) which is a mythological prison.

Peter refers to the angels who in the time of Noah foresook thier original positions and became men in order to have relations with the women of earth. The result was their offspring being giants, the Nephilim, who caused so much trouble God had to bring forth the flood. ( Genesis 6:1-4 / Ephesians 6:10-12 / Jude 1:6 ).

It is interesting that this verse is often mistranslated because when Jesus was resurrected from Sheol / Hades ( Hell in some translations ) on earth, he first went to tartarus – that is to say the disobedient angels whom had been lowered in position – who happened to be in heaven. This means that if you don’t understand the mistranslation you would see Jesus go to hell on earth and then hell in heaven.

The Pagan Hell

The Pagan teaching of hell was adopted by the apostate Christian church. Today’s thinking of hell comes more from Dante’s Divine Comedy and Milton’s Paradise Lost, but the teaching of hellfire is much older than the English word hell or Dante and Milton. It comes from Babylonian and Assyrian beliefs of a nether world. A place where gods and demons of great strength and fierceness presided over the damned.

Ancient Egyptian beliefs considered the Other World to be a place of pits of fire for the damned though they didn’t think this lasted forever.
Islamic teaching considers hell as a place of everlasting punishment. Hindus and Buddhists think of hell as a place of spiritual cleansing and final restoration.

Separation From God

Hell ( as is often translated from the Hebrew Sheohl ) can’t be a separation from God, since God is in effect there – it is in front of him. He watches sheol for the time when the dead shall be resurrected. ( Proverbs 15:11 / Psalm 139:7-8 / Amos 9:1-2 )

Lazarus And The Rich Man – Luke 16:19-31

Jesus often taught people in a way which was easy for them to grasp. One way of doing this is through parables, or illustration. They are stories, which are not meant to be taken as literal accounts. Such is the case with the story of Lazarus and the Rich Man. Notice that the Rich man is buried in hades. If this account is to be taken literally then the Bible would contradict itself with all of the information being given in this post, but lets not leave it up to what may be thought to be my own personal interpretation.

Let it also be known that if this account is to be taken literally then that would make Jesus a liar. How so? How could Lazarus be at the bosom of Abraham in heaven when Jesus had already said that no man had ascended to heaven other than himself? ( John 3:13 )

The Lake Of Fire

The lake of fire is sometimes referred to as hell. This isn’t even worth mentioning in my opinion because the lake of fire is obviously a symbolic reference to everlasting destruction. Since hell itself is cast into the lake of fire along with death and Satan, all of this ties up rather nicely in that Adam’s sin brought death. Had Adam not sinned therefore he wouldn’t have died. Jesus takes away sin so the meek shall inherit the earth and live forever upon it. Death will be no more. Sin will be no more. Hell ( the common grave of mankind ) will be no more and Satan will be no more.

Reference

“Sheol was located somewhere ‘under’ the earth . . . . The state of the dead was one of neither pain nor pleasure. Neither reward for the righteous nor punishment for the wicked was associated with Sheol. The good and bad alike, tyrants and saints, kings and orphans, Israelites and gentiles – all slept together without awareness of one another.” – Encyclpædia Britannica (1971, Vol. 11, p. 276)

“Hades . . . it corresponds to ‘Sheol’ in the O.T. and N.T., it has been unhappily rendered ‘hell’ ” – Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words (1981, Vol. 2 p. 187)

“First it (Hell) stands for the Hebrew Sheohl of the Old Testament and the Greek Hades of the Septuagint and New Testament . Since Sheohl in Old Testament times referred simply to the abode of the dead and suggested no moral distinctions, the word ‘hell,’ as understood today, is not a happy translation.” – Collier’s Encyclopedia (1986, Vol. 12, p. 28)

“Much Confusion and misunderstanding has been caused through the early translators of the Bible persistently rendering the Hebrew Sheohl and the Greek Hades and Gehenna by the word hell. The simple transliteration of these words by the translators of the revised editions of the Bible has not sufficed to appreciably clear up this confusion and misconception.” – The Encyclopedia Americana (1956, Vol. XIV, p. 81)

“The word ( sheol ) occurs often in the Psalms and in the book of Job to refer to the place to which all dead people go. It is represented as a dark place, in which there is no activity worthy of the name. There are no moral distinction there, so ‘hell’ ( KJV ) is not a suitable translation, since that suggests a contrast with ‘heaven’ as the dwelling-place of the righteous after death. In a sense, ‘the grave’ in a generic sense is a near equivalent, except that Sheol is more a mass grave in which all the dead dwell together . . . . The use of this particular imagery may have been considered suitable here [ in Jonah 2:2 ] in view of Jonah’s imprisonment in the interior of the fish.” – A Translators Handbook on the Book of Jonah, Brynmor F. Price and Eugene A. Nida, 1978, p 37

I’m not exactly sure what to make of it, seeing as I have hardly any experience with the study of history and linguistics. If there are any linguists that have studied the areas and wish to comment, please do so. The original forum thread can be found here.

Possibly Related Posts:

So, “Atheist Central” Wants To Know About Atheism?

Adrian Hayter — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 02:39:24 +0000

Ray Comfort, who recently changed his blog name to “Atheist Central”, has revealed he is writing a new book. It will have a chapter on atheism, and he wanted to know a few things:

I have a new book coming out soon. There will be a chapter on atheism. Tell me, what do atheists (officially) believe about:

God:

The Bible:

Heaven & Hell:

Sin:

Salvation:

Jesus:

Firstly, unlike Christianity we don’t have a doctrine telling us what to believe, so I can only answer the first of that list definitively. The others are down to personal beliefs, and I shall define my own.

God: All atheists disbelieve in all gods.

The Bible: I think the Bible is simply a book of stories and rules, written by man. It has no divine meaning (see above point about God). It was written to try and explain the unexplainable, but also to control people and make them easier to govern, using the threat of death and hellfire. In a modern society it should not be taken literally at all.

Heaven & Hell: I do not believe in either because I don’t think there is any valid reason why we would have an afterlife. However, I know some atheists who do believe in an “afterlife” of sorts, citing that the conscious mind could go on after death. I don’t think any atheists believe in Heaven & Hell in the Biblical perspective, because it goes against the point about God (again, see above).

Sin: I do not believe there is such a thing as sin, mainly because I do not believe that the Bible is anything other than a load of stories. If there is sin, then there must be moral absolutes, which do not exist because our stance on morality has changed over time. Homosexuality was originally thought of as fine, then the Christians decided it was evil, and now most of us think it is fine again. A continually evolving morality does not have sin, unless the sin were to evolve with it, which makes the entire point of it useless.

Salvation: Seeing as I do not believe in an afterlife, the concept of salvation seems ridiculous and unnecessary to me.

Jesus: Whether Jesus existed or not we may never know. I have mixed opinions on the subject. If he did exist then I think he was probably a very good teacher, who had interesting philosophies. If he claimed to be the Son of God then I would think he was mentally unstable, and probably got a load of followers the same way modern day “messiahs” like Michael Travesser do.

So there you go Ray, I have answered your questions. Feel free to put my answers in your book. My only demands are that I am fully cited (the entire url to my blog post in a footnote or something), and if possible, a free copy of your book when it comes out. You can contact me here.

Possibly Related Posts:

He’s Not The Messiah – He’s A Very Naughty Boy

Adrian Hayter — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 22:48:59 +0000

Many people will recognise the above title as a line from Monty Python’s “Life of Brian“. Well, that is most people except those in the Welsh town of Aberystwyth where the film has been banned from viewing since its release, 29 years ago. The current Mayor, Sue Jones-Davies, starred in the movie as Brians girlfriend and now wants the ban lifed.

However, she might have to fight through some angry Christians to do it. Local reverend Stuart Bell says that attitudes amongst Christians have not changed (well when have they ever).

The film at its root is poking fun at Christ and we don’t want that to happen. I don’t think that the film should be shown. Why should the ban be removed?

Why? I’ll tell you why. It’s hilarious, has a great plot, and appeals to all ages. 30 years ago it was a breakthrough for freedom of speech and expression, making an obvious challenge to the countries blasphemy laws. It also outlined the irrational sheep-like followers of religion:

Brian: Look, you’ve got it all wrong! You don’t need to follow me, you don’t need to follow anybody! You’ve got to think for yourselves! You’re all individuals!
The Crowd (in unison): Yes! We’re all individuals!
Brian: You’re all different!
The Crowd (in unison): Yes, we are all different!
Man in Crowd: I’m not…
The Crowd: Shhh!

Of course Mr Bell has good reason to oppose the film, having only seen “a small clip, that’s all“. I doubt very much he saw the sermon on the mount part, or that he knows that Brian repeatedly tries to shake off the attention. No, Mr Bell just assumes the entire movie is about mocking Jesus.

Un-ban the movie, and make a whole new generation laugh.

Possibly Related Posts:

Zombie Jesus

Adrian Hayter — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 03:38:52 +0000

Ewan (guy who looks after the server) found this earlier today and I couldn’t resist posting it:

Possibly Related Posts:

Stop Using Jesus As An Excuse For Being A Narrow Minded Bigot

Adrian Hayter — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 00:00:44 +0000

Just a funny image I found on the internet yesterday:

I *really* want that as a bumper sticker, or at least as a sign to go in front of my house…or in my window.

Possibly Related Posts:

Blown Wide Open – Praying For The Sick Part 2

Adrian Hayter — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 09:23:18 +0000

Well it was inevitable that the wide media coverage of this story would blow a hole wide open and reveal similar stories that have been covered up in the past. Debunking Christianity found just a few of these stories, the most recent reporting that the accused parental murderers will be facing prosecution for the manslaughter of their 15 month old daughter who died in March this year.

This report uncovered the fundamentalis church “Followers of Christ”, which has a long history of toturing and murdering children. The church practices faith healing, but goes further than most churches by shunning those who go against church doctrine, a crime which includes seeking medical help. It’s a simple but deadly scare tactic: Go to a doctor…go to hell.

What really sickens me about these people is this part of the article:

During the latter part of the twentieth century, the church began to attract attention from authorities in the state of Oregon due to an unusally-high mortality rate among its children. Larry Lewman, a former medical examiner in the state alleges that during a ten-year period, twenty-five children perished due to lack of medical intervention–a death rate 26 times higher than the general population; an investigation by The Oregonian claimed that 21 out of 78 minors found to be buried in the church cemetary died of preventable causes, including simple infections which would be easily treated with routine antibiotics.

25 children and indeed more over the history of the church have been routinely tortured and executed by loving ignorant parents who are so deluded they think 1 out of 1000 miraculous healings is evidence of divine intervention. Then again, this is the same thinking from the people who visit Lourdes seeking a miracle which has only appeared just over 60 times in the entire long history of the place.

Luckily, this time it seems Oregon have placed measurements in the law to make sure these people cannot get away with it. They will be charged and go to prison for their crimes, and hopefully America might be on the verge to waking up.

I’d like to finish by echoing a statement made by Evan over at Debunking Christianity:

Please, someone, tell me how prayer for the sick is good and righteous. Please, I can’t understand how that can be when I keep seeing all these dead kids.

Possibly Related Posts:

Praying For The Sick

Adrian Hayter — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 15:39:26 +0000

I honestly didn’t want to cover this story, not because so many others had already done so, but because it literally chilled me to the bone, and I find myself sickened whenever I read it. However, Evan over at the Debunking Christianity blog wrote an investigative story on the subject, which I couldn’t ignore.

For those who are unaware of the story (which is probably a minority), I will give a brief description. 11 year old Madeline Kara Neumann (pictured above) died from diabetic ketoacidosis, a perfectly treatable condition, and one which the majority of people do not die from. I’d like to say that her illness was the primary cause of death, but sadly that is not the case. Madeline Neumann was murdered by her parents, who were so ignorant of the situation around them, they decided that the power of prayer, not medicine would save their daughter.

Madeline saw a doctor at age 3, and would not see another until her body was examined at the local hospital, a good few hours after she died. She had been off her medication for most of her life, but when her illness became too great, she fell unconscious and died. All the while her murderers refused to take her to hopsital, and in fact a 911 call that eventually alerted the hospital came from a relation outside the immediate family.

A ministry that were close to the family recently wrote this press release. In it, the spokesperson says:

We are not commanded in scripture to send people to the doctor but to meet their needs through prayer and faith. As anyone here in the ministry will tell you, we are not against doctors for those who have their faith there and never condemn or restrict them in any way. But we know that the best one to trust in for healing is Jesus Christ.

This level of ignorance and stupidity cannot continue. In an increasingly secular nation like the United Kingdom, such an excuse would have been rejected by every single court, and the parents would currently be facing a long prison sentence for murder through negligence. However what we find in the USA, is the other three children being returned to the parents as if nothing had happened. A prosecution is being set up by the police, but Wisconsin law dictates parents cannot be charged if they relied on prayer. Essentially, in the terms of Wisconsin courts, God failed, not the parents. One can only hope that they are charged with abuse or neglect relating to their failure to provide adequent medical attention to their child.

What further astounds me in the press release is this:

The next thing I heard from them was that they were being investigated, which is sad since authorities don’t investigate the people who put their trust in doctors whose family members die by the hundreds of thousands from medical mistakes every year, according the AMA’s own admission. We know that the doctors do the best they can with what they have and we do not condemn them. We would like the same consideration.

Yes, people die from medical mistakes, and perhaps one of those mistakes would have killed Madeline if she had seen a doctor, but that is a very unlikely outcome. The doctors do the best they can, but this group, and these parents did not. They sat and prayed to a non existant God in hope of a miracle (which would be the first of it’s kind I’d like to point out). They claim they didn’t have enough faith, but I’d like to propose they didn’t have enough brains to realise their delusion and help their daughter.

On the good side of this story (if indeed we can view any of it as good), this entire event has become very public, not just in the blogging community, but in international news as well. One can only hope that more parents get this message, and send their children to doctors instead of using prayer.

Possibly Related Posts:

The Bible: Impassioned Truth Or A Load Of Lies?

Adrian Hayter — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 01:10:18 +0000

This week at my university, the Christian Union are holding a “Jesus Awareness Week” (J.A.W) and although I am only involved in one of the events (a debate on Thursday), I am trying to attend as many as I can. Last night’s talk was on the Bible (as the title of this article suggests), and the speaker was the son of Michael Howard. He came up with a list of reasons why people should trust the Bible:

The Bible proves itself to be trustworthy. It’s so obviously true that we don’t need to question it’s trustworthiness.

Yes, he actually opened his argument with that one. The standard circular argument that goes against all common sense and justification. It wouldn’t have been such a big deal if he hadn’t stated that that reason alone should convert you to Christianity. If it were so “obviously” true then rational people wouldn’t reject it, or go and worship other Gods.

The Gospels are based off eyewitness accounts from people who were alive at the time of Christ.

John was written around 90A.D, and he used this as an example. Given that the average life expectancy of people back then was much lower than it is today, the chances of someone actually seeing Jesus perform a miracle, and then living to be over 70 (if we take it as read that they would have to have been around 10 years old at the time of Jesus’ death) are remote at best. Even if this did happen, the eyewitness accounts of a child are rarely 100% accurate, and so we would have to find an eyewitness who lived to be around 76 at least, which 2000 years ago would have been even more miraculous than walking on water.

Not one of the gospels mentions the destruction of Jerusalem in 70A.D, so they must have been written before 70A.D.

This point was filled with pure inaccuracies, as I have already mentioned that the Gospel of John was written around 90A.D, and the Gospel of Mark was written after 70A.D since it does contain references to the fall of Jerusalem.

If the gospels were a hoax, they are a very bad hoax. The first person to see Jesus alive was a woman, and in that period of history it was unusual for a woman’s word to be trusted.

Yet even so, people believed her. Although there are some points that can be discussed here, the fact that people did believe shows that women were trusted somewhat. Since we are already doubting the very factual accuracy of the stories in the gospels, whether it was a woman or not is hardly a big deal.

The key facts are confirmed by non-Christian historians. Roman historian Tacitus mentions the crucifixion in his Annals writings.

Putting aside the doubts that Jesus existed, this point merely shows that there was a recorded man by the name of Jesus who was executed. It does not say he was divine, neither does it say anything about him, other than he committed blasphemy.

Paul’s first letter was written in 52A.D so it was in the time line for eyewitness accounts.

However, as I mentioned in “Jesus Christ – Fact or Fiction?“, Paul never met Jesus, which means even if he was told the story from an eyewitness, the source is secondary, and therefore prone to inaccuracies. It should also be noted that Paul always envisioned Christ in heaven, not on Earth, and that none of the miracles he supposedly performed were known about by Paul. If an eyewitness did indeed inform Paul of Jesus, why did they leave out such important parts of the story?

After the talk, the speaker admitted to the fact that the church left out gospels that were deemed to “lessen” the view of Jesus as the son of God, and outright denied the Dead Sea Scrolls as fakes, because they were written too far after the crucifixion. Actually, scientists are still unsure about the dating on the Dead Sea Scrolls, but the current estimate is between the 2nd century B.C and the 1st century A.D, so the scrolls that mention Jesus come pretty close to his supposed “resurrection”.

We were left with an ultimatum: Since Christianity is so truthful and easily trusted (according to him anyway), the burden of proof lies with the sceptics to find an alternative reason why Christianity spread so fast during after Christ’s death. Hardly the ultimatum a person whose entire belief system is structured around 100% faith should be advertising.