I have been reading the numerous posts on these boards where individuals are arguing for and against the truth claims of Christianity. There is one argument which easily proves that Christianity is false. Surprisingly, I haven't seen this argument on this board. It may be here but I just haven't seen it.
One only needs to read the 4 gospels along with the rest of the NT to draw this simple conclusion. The evidence is all there in the NT itself. Jesus believed that he was a prophet of Yahweh who was chosen to announce the imminent arrival of the Kingdom of God. Jesus first predicted that the Kingdom of God would come within his lifetime. When he realized that he was going to die for his mission, he predicted that the Kingdom of God would come soon after his death.
After the death of Jesus, the early church in Jerusalem and Paul preached the imminent arrival of the Kingdom of God. They all believed that the Kingdom was going to come within their lifetimes. Where did they get this idea? From the prediction of their prophet/messiah, Jesus of Nazareth.
The gospels written in the later part of the first century still reflect the belief that the Kingdom of God/Jesus was coming very soon. The gospel of Mark (first gospel written) even has a long discourse (Mark 13) where Jesus predicts the destruction of the Temple and then his return soon after that. (The gospel was probably written after the destruction of the Temple.) This later Christian generation was reinterpreting the proclamation of the early church to fit their times. Matthew and Luke do the same thing but they interpret it according to the beliefs of their particular Christian community. By the end of the first century, the writer of the gospel of John eliminates the second coming (Kingdom of God) idea altogether.
One of the later epistles has an explanation of the delay of the second coming, saying that a day is like a thousand years to the Lord. (Here began the lame arguments for Christianity that we deal with to this day.) John of Patmos (writer of Revelation) wrote his only particular version of end time events using many OT symbols. He also was convinced that the second coming was going to happen very soon. He was writing around the end of the first century. Notice that he reinterprets the proclamation of the early church too.
It is 2000 years later and the Kingdom did not come within his lifetime nor within the lifetime of his disciples as Jesus predicted. All this evidence is in the NT, the very book called the "Word of God" by Christians. I did not quote verses because there are numerous ones to quote in support of this. I would just encourage all to take an objective look at the various writings about the second coming/Kingdom of God in the NT. Also, if you have read writings by various Christians in the last 2000 years, especially in the 20th century, you will notice how Christians have tried to explain away this idea that the second coming was supposed to happen back in the first century. Christians cannot even agree on the proper interpretation of "end time" events (second coming.) There was even a book written in the late 1800's by a Christian who tried to reconcile these second coming predictions in the NT by claiming that all the NT books were written prior to the destruction of the Temple in 70AD. He claimed that the second coming happened in 70AD. However, if the second coming/Kingdom of God came in 70AD then where is it? Jesus taught many things about how the world would be when the Kingdom of God came to Earth and none of those are happening.
For me, this is the end of the story. I do not feel compelled to argue with Christians about the truth claims of Christianity. They are very clearly false for the reason described above (and for many others too.) Most Christians have made a heavy emotional (psychological) investment in their faith and they are not about to abandon it for anything. If you could somehow produce the skeletal remains of Jesus and prove it was him, Christians would continue to believe. Christian scholars would write a thousand books trying to explain it away.
It really comes down to understanding how religion works psychologically and socially. Most Christians are not interested in arguments because faith is not about arguments. It's about the ultimate questions of life and death. Religion provides a comforting (in their minds) answer to these questions. I actually have no objection to people being religious. The problem is when they try to convince the rest of us that they have the one and only truth. It is so easy to prove that they do not so why not just be religious and leave the rest of us alone. We need to change religion so that it becomes a more personal, private matter.
-
- Information on this archive. See IIDB.org
-
-
Please join us on IIDB (iidb.org)
This is the archived FRDB and IIDB forum from prior to about March 2014. It is read only. If you would like to respond or otherwise revive a post or topic, please join us on the active forum: IIDB.
-
End of Story
Another popular response to this is to quote 11 Peter 3:8, which says that one day to god is a thousand years to us, so in fact Jesus has only been out to lunch for two days.
The ultimate fallback position is that "soon" does not really mean "soon". And god will come back when he damn well feels like it.
Norm
The ultimate fallback position is that "soon" does not really mean "soon". And god will come back when he damn well feels like it.
Norm
Except that if the Bible was inspired by God, then it wasn't written FOR god, it was written for humans. Thus, this amounts to deliberate misinformation.<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by fromdownunder:
Another popular response to this is to quote 11 Peter 3:8, which says that one day to god is a thousand years to us, so in fact Jesus has only been out to lunch for two days.
</font>