digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at telegraph.co.uk

Easter Warning: Crucifixion is bad for you!

telegraph.co.uk — Many people in the Philippines consider crucifixion and self flagellation good for the soul, but it is bad for your health according to new government advice for penitents. The festival is sponsored by Coca-cola and a company called Smart Telecommunications. Some 23 people, including two women, plan to reenact the crucifixion

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • dshey, on 03/20/2008, -1/+26in related news, resurrection rates at an all time high.
    • vanzan, on 03/20/2008, -8/+3Anyone, show me where Jesus says in the Bible " I am your lord, worship me" or anything similar.
      • troon, on 03/20/2008, -2/+4Mostly in the New Testament. Try John 3:16, then John 10:30. Is that the sort of thing you're after?
        • vanzan, on 03/20/2008, -3/+3None of them served my purpose.
          You can interpret them in anyway you want. The fact is, there's nothing in the bible that proves that Jesus is God and that he told people to worship him.
          • Charlotte_Web, on 03/20/2008, -2/+2John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God."

            John 1:14" the Word became flesh and dwelt among us."
          • vanzan, on 03/20/2008, -2/+1Nope. You are not answering my question.
          • aristotle0dude, on 03/22/2008, -0/+1Wow you are either a real wanker or you have a problem with reading comprehension. They already gave you verses where Jesus said that he is God. What more do you want? You do realize that God gave us free will don't you? God is not going to force anyone to worship him.
    • DarkDragon, on 03/20/2008, -0/+10?
    • deslock, on 03/20/2008, -0/+1Crap! Someone could have labeled this article with a "spoiler alert" couldn't they?
  • Pigeon, on 03/20/2008, -3/+37Nailing yourself to a piece of wood is bad for you? No *****!
    • robotto, on 03/20/2008, -0/+3I doubt they do it themselves. They just lie down and have their friends do it.
      • CSharpSauce, on 03/20/2008, -0/+2I'd reconsider my friendship if they were willing to nail me to a piece of wood (except my girlfriend... i'd let her nail me any time ;) )
        • Jolene, on 03/20/2008, -2/+1Stop pretending you have a girlfriend.
    • Bodhinature, on 03/20/2008, -0/+2Also, sponsored by Coke!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • AyaJulia, on 03/20/2008, -1/+56Man, if these people were doing this in any context other than a religious ritual, they would be in psych wards. ._.
    • Charlotte_Web, on 03/20/2008, -0/+6I would say that even the context of a religious ritual, these folks are nuts.

      Not to mention the fact that they seemed to have completely missed the message of the New Testament.
    • Zuggy, on 03/20/2008, -0/+5The thing I find funny is that Jesus wasn't executed in a unique fashion, and many Christians don't realize that. Being crucified was one of the Roman Empire's favorite forms of execution. Sure many (most?) were just tied with rope and left to suffocate, but wearing a cross would be no different then wearing a little syringe to signify lethal injection if he were executed today.
      • Charlotte_Web, on 03/20/2008, -1/+2On the contrary, it's common knowledge among Christians that crucifixion was a common means of execution during Jesus's day.

        The cross is just an easy symbol to duplicate.
  • xsecretfiles, on 03/20/2008, -7/+10Crucifixion makes baby Jesus Cry!
    • FistOfBlog, on 03/20/2008, -0/+1Makes statues of grown-up Jesus cry too.
  • daxsymbiont, on 03/20/2008, -14/+26religious lunatics.

    there'll be a time, religiousness will be considered, or should I say, realized, to be a condition.
    • Jovensdesciple, on 03/20/2008, -18/+6Asshat, i bet you like world of warcraft and satan but you hate girls.
      • Pigeon, on 03/20/2008, -1/+12Is that your best comeback? He's right, there is not one shred of evidence supporting that religion is true yet billions of people seem stupid/scared/unhappy/brainwashed (take your pick) enough to believe it. If your so right... prove it.
        • Jovensdesciple, on 03/20/2008, -13/+2There's not one shred of evidence against religion is there *****? And i don't need one of my best comebacks wasted on your dumbass or anyone like you. So you are lame/weak/gay (take your pick). But i know which one you picked, and so does your boyfriend.
          • Coffeedemon, on 03/20/2008, -1/+10You know... I think its embarrassing to see a response like that from a 23 year old.
            Calm down and grow up. The original statement might be a bit inflammatory but nowhere near this foolishness.
          • Murdats, on 03/20/2008, -1/+2and until you can provide some evidense that I am not a god who chooses to not display my powers, or that my etherial dragon does not exist I shall continue to believe it all and continue to preach it to all I meet.
        • moonguidex, on 03/20/2008, -4/+3Why are you so angry? God not treating you right?
    • yingjai, on 03/20/2008, -3/+3i dont think religion should be completely recognized as a condition. there are some who just believe in the values... the good stuff. then there are the religious nuts who believe they are the messenger or something along those lines. those people have a condition and belong in an institute. anyone seen the movie The Mist? those nuts belong in a mental institute.
      • PaxImperium, on 03/20/2008, -2/+11Can't people just believe in the good stuff and dump all the superstitious garbage?
        • ssn697, on 03/20/2008, -1/+3Too many people have to justify their bigotry and hatred by pointing to "the good book".
    • artliquide, on 03/20/2008, -2/+6At least they have corporate sponsorship.
    • MisteryMeat, on 03/21/2008, -0/+1Let's pray that you're right.
  • digitinfinity, on 03/20/2008, -4/+25Anyone willing to do this should be encouraged as a way to remove them from the gene pool.
  • Jovensdesciple, on 03/20/2008, -12/+2What's good enough for Jesus is good enough for me.
  • phatbyte, on 03/20/2008, -1/+27"The festival is sponsored by Coca-cola..." just in case for those rusty nails xD
  • joebonk, on 03/20/2008, -12/+11why would anyone do this? their ancestors were brainwashed catholic by spaniards 400 years ago.
    religion is ***** by the way, if you believe a religion youd believe anything
  • sfacets, on 03/20/2008, -8/+10Christianofascists. Sorry, had to put it out there.
    • Suricou, on 03/20/2008, -0/+1Inaccurate. They dont want to make anyone else get crucified. The correct insult is 'chrisomasochist.'
  • BrentyD, on 03/20/2008, -3/+11this is ***** retarded
  • closetosomet, on 03/20/2008, -1/+4"NaN undefined : Why the BBC thinks Christ did not die this way"
    classic!
  • Khast, on 03/20/2008, -2/+8Religion makes you do some pretty weird things. Worst of it is, they think you aren't good enough for god, unless you are willing to do these crazy things. This happens in almost all organized religions....just to different degrees of insanity.
  • dildoolielly, on 03/20/2008, -19/+22Okay Christians lets take a little quiz...

    WHO IS THIS GOD?

    -was born on December 25th.
    -was considered a great traveling teacher and master.
    -had 12 companions or disciples.
    -performed miracles.
    -was buried in a tomb.
    -after three days he rose again.
    -his resurrection was celebrated every year.
    -was called "the Good Shepherd."
    -was considered "the Way, the Truth and the Light, the Redeemer, the Savior, the Messiah."
    -was identified with both the Lion and the Lamb.
    -his sacred day was Sunday, "the Lord's Day,".
    -he had his principal festival on what was later to become Easter, at which time he was resurrected.
    -his religion had a Eucharist or "Lord's Supper."

    If you guessed Jesus Christ, well, YOU'D BE WRONG!! HE WAS... MITHRA, a Roman-Persian God who's story existed hundreds of years before Christ.

    ("He who will not eat of my body and drink of my blood, so that he will be made on with me and I with him, the same shall not know salvation." This inscription to Mithras, which parallels John 6:53-54, is inside the Vatican in the tomb of Saint Peter.)

    http://www.vetssweatshop.net/dogma.htm
    • MacParrot, on 03/20/2008, -14/+3Yes I know you think you're clever, but those that are true believers won't listen and those who don't won't care. I know you spend a lot of time being all self-righteous and that seems to be your whole reason for posting on digg. Believe it or not it IS possible to believe in God WITHOUT being blinded by fairy tales of great floods or women being turned into pillars of salt for looking at the wrong thing (Victoria's Secret catalogs?).
      There is no doubt amongst those who DO listen that Christianity, Islam, and Judaism borrowed heavily from other sources in creating their rituals and stories and Holy days etc. You, however, would throw out the baby with the bath water, Many great thinkers and scientists believe in God without subscribing to the notion that there is ONE true religion (which is what leads to 99% of the problems between religions). They and I just don't believe that humans are the pinnacle of intelligence in a vast universe. Science does fill in many of the holes that religions once described as God inspired, but for every question answered, there are just as many either not answered or newly created.
      This post has gone on too long. Look, it is possible to believe in God WITHOUT believing in religion.
      • PaxImperium, on 03/20/2008, -1/+9"Believe it or not it IS possible to believe in God WITHOUT being blinded by fairy tales of great floods or women being turned into pillars of salt for looking at the wrong thing (Victoria's Secret catalogs?)."
        What makes YOUR religious belief more valid than anyone elses?

        "Many great thinkers and scientists believe in God without subscribing to the notion that there is ONE true religion (which is what leads to 99% of the problems between religions)."
        ...and how is this relevant?

        "They and I just don't believe that humans are the pinnacle of intelligence in a vast universe. Science does fill in many of the holes that religions once described as God inspired, but for every question answered, there are just as many either not answered or newly created."
        So basically, "We don't all the answers therefore I will make up an answer with no evidence to fill this blank." Got it.

        "This post has gone on too long. Look, it is possible to believe in God WITHOUT believing in religion."
        Why?
        • hmcook87, on 03/20/2008, -3/+2yes, its called Deism. quite common among great thinkers of the past (Einstein, Spinoza etc). Of course that was about as close to atheism as it was socially acceptable back in the day.
        • MacParrot, on 03/20/2008, -3/+1"What makes YOUR religious belief more valid than anyone elses?"
          Absolutely nothing and I never claimed it did. I also didn't claim to be religious.
          "Many great thinkers and scientists believe in God without subscribing to the notion that there is ONE true religion (which is what leads to 99% of the problems between religions)."
          ...and how is this relevant?"
          It's relevant to dildo's post which is what I was replying to. A belief in God AND science does not have to exclusive. As long as you don't push your beliefs on someone else, what difference does it make what someone believes in? That's my problem with most organized religion in that it's their way or the highway (to hell).
          "They and I just don't believe that humans are the pinnacle of intelligence in a vast universe. Science does fill in many of the holes that religions once described as God inspired, but for every question answered, there are just as many either not answered or newly created.
          So basically, "We don't all the answers therefore I will make up an answer with no evidence to fill this blank." Got it. "
          You didn't even try to understand what I was saying. I didn't say that since science doesn't have all the answers that you have to attribute it to God. That's foolish and self-defeating. Science will eventually fill IN the blanks once we have a greater understanding of the universe. Still doesn't mean that God doesn't exist or is in some form that we can't understand. Science is man's attempt to understand what was formally attributed to what most religions claim is God's creation. Did God create the heavens and earth? I have no idea and won't push God as the solution to what science doesn't YET understand.
          "Look, it is possible to believe in God WITHOUT believing in religion.
          Why?"
          The "Why" you have to answer for yourself. If you don't want to believe that something could be bigger than yourself or humankind, no amount of digg posts would change your mind. Believe what you want to believe. Free will and all that.
        • PaxImperium, on 03/20/2008, -0/+5"Absolutely nothing and I never claimed it did. I also didn't claim to be religious."
          Quote:
          Believe it or not it IS possible to believe in God WITHOUT being blinded by fairy tales of great floods.

          Maybe I should be more specific, what makes YOUR claim of a god more valid than anyone elses?

          "It's relevant to dildo's post which is what I was replying to. A belief in God AND science does not have to exclusive. As long as you don't push your beliefs on someone else, what difference does it make what someone believes in? That's my problem with most organized religion in that it's their way or the highway (to hell)."
          A belief is science and a God are epistomologically exclusive. Theistic belief relies on faith with is the opposite of science. I have no issue with theistic belief, I do have an issue with any theistic claims. Any claim can and must be challenged, there is nothing "sacred" about a belief in a god.

          "Still doesn't mean that God doesn't exist or is in some form that we can't understand. Science is man's attempt to understand what was formally attributed to what most religions claim is God's creation. Did God create the heavens and earth? I have no idea and won't push God as the solution to what science doesn't YET understand."
          I agree that we may never ever have any evidence to support or reject the existance of a god therefore why even bother to respect an unsubstantiated claim?
          If a theist believes in a god and does not preach or make any claims, it would not a problem. However, many do and that is not acceptable.

          "The "Why" you have to answer for yourself. If you don't want to believe that something could be bigger than yourself or humankind, no amount of digg posts would change your mind. Believe what you want to believe. Free will and all that."
          Which does not answer my question. Just because you WANT to believe in "that something could be bigger than yourself or humankind", does not make it true or even a justified belief.
          • MacParrot, on 03/20/2008, -3/+1"Maybe I should be more specific, what makes YOUR claim of a god more valid than anyone elses?"
            Absolutely nothing and I never said that it was. It is simply my belief. People are free to make up their own minds and except in instances where they would hurt others to force their beliefs, I wouldn't criticize them for doing so.

            "A belief is science and a God are epistomologically exclusive. Theistic belief relies on faith with is the opposite of science. I have no issue with theistic belief, I do have an issue with any theistic claims. Any claim can and must be challenged, there is nothing "sacred" about a belief in a god."
            Not necessarily. There are many concepts in science that cannot be proven, but a belief in them are necessary to further our knowledge. Particle physics is a good example. A lot of it cannot be proven (for now), but the theories put forth are consistent and the way interaction takes place shows that it is a good possibility that it is true (obviously I'm not a physicist). Hawkins theories about black holes and I suppose there are others as well. Observation doesn't always equal proof, it simply means that it is what is currently known and accepted. Theistic beliefs don't HAVE to conflict with science. Not every scientist is an agnostic or atheist. I do agree that any claim of "God's hand" in some observational event should be challenged. If God does exist, I can't see why he would bother doing parlor tricks.

            "I agree that we may never ever have any evidence to support or reject the existence of a god therefore why even bother to respect an unsubstantiated claim?
            If a theist believes in a god and does not preach or make any claims, it would not a problem. However, many do and that is not acceptable."
            Investigating phenomena that is not clearly understood is the basis for almost any scientific endeavor. As we understand more about the universe and our place in it, maybe we will eventually find some evidence of God. I'm not saying that is where it will lead. Maybe we'll discover instead that our planet was designed by intelligent mice from the fourth dimension. As far as preaching about God, I wouldn't be comfortable doing so to a group of people (digg notwithstanding), but many people take a great deal of comfort from it. Different strokes and all that.

            "Which does not answer my question. Just because you WANT to believe in "that something could be bigger than yourself or humankind", does not make it true or even a justified belief."
            I never, ever claimed that it was true. As far as justification goes, if it is MY belief, what other justification is necessary?

          • PaxImperium, on 03/20/2008, -0/+4"Absolutely nothing and I never said that it was. It is simply my belief. People are free to make up their own minds and except in instances where they would hurt others to force their beliefs, I wouldn't criticize them for doing so."
            Thanks for the clarification.

            "Not necessarily. There are many concepts in science that cannot be proven, but a belief in them are necessary to further our knowledge. "
            I disagree. I'm a Bayesian Probability adherent and what may be true is based on evidence. Many concepts of science are unproven(proof only exist in math) BUT all scientific concepts can be falsified which means that it can be "proven". Only a few assumptions exist in science. Faith and many theistic beliefs can never be falsified.

            "Observation doesn't always equal proof, it simply means that it is what is currently known and accepted."
            An observation is a single datapoint and adds to a body of evidence to either support of disprove a claim.

            "Theistic beliefs don't HAVE to conflict with science."
            No they don't but theistic claims do.

            "Not every scientist is an agnostic or atheist."
            So? I don't get the relevance of this statement.

            "Investigating phenomena that is not clearly understood is the basis for almost any scientific endeavor."
            What phenomena? You actually have to show that there is even a phenomena to investigate. Many scientists are already studying god as nothing more than a neurological effect.

            "As we understand more about the universe and our place in it, maybe we will eventually find some evidence of God. I'm not saying that is where it will lead."
            Maybe. But why belief in a god until this occurs?

            "I never, ever claimed that it was true. As far as justification goes, if it is MY belief, what other justification is necessary?"
            That is an actual answer. No, if you believe in something without any justification or evidence, that is your prerogative. However, there are some people who are actually interested in figuring out if our beliefs are actually true.
      • dildoolielly, on 03/20/2008, -1/+3-----------------Believe it or not it IS possible to believe in God WITHOUT being blinded by fairy tales of great floods or women being turned into pillars of salt for looking at the wrong thing (Victoria's Secret catalogs?).-------------------

        Yeah, you follow your invisible man in the sky better than how they follow their invisible man in the sky, right?

        Please, your comment isn't even relevant to the topic. It is a religious misrepresentation of another religion. Compounding a wrong interpretation with a wrong concept. 2 wrongs don't make a right' three lefts do.

        • MacParrot, on 03/20/2008, -3/+1dildo, considering that your post also had nothing to do with the topic and was simply put in to make fun of people with different beliefs (right or wrong) than you, you really don't have a leg to stand on in regards to being off-topic. As far as my beliefs go, I believe in God. I don't believe in religion. I also don't tell people that they are stupid because they don't believe as I do.
    • hmcook87, on 03/20/2008, -2/+8you're right. many religious people have parted from reason long ago, no amount of logical argument or evidence will sway them as they can always come up with some excuse or just ignore the subject altogether. some religious people however are only religious because they haven't really through about it much, if these people make the effort to do a bit of critical thinking they will quite often "see the light" and come over to the side of reason, logic and evidence. Religion was humanities first and most primitive attempt at science and philosophy, it's sad that so many people live their lives in a fantasy world, believing they can chat with the all-powerful creator of the universe.
    • Charlotte_Web, on 03/20/2008, -4/+9Where to start, where to start...

      First of all, read this scholarly rebuttal of your list:

      http://www.tektonics.org/copycat/mithra.html

      To summary, Mithraism predated Christianity, to be sure; however, most of what is known about Mithraism (which is very little) comes from the period when Mithraism and Christianity were in competition with each other in ancient Rome. The B.C.E. version of Mithraism does not support your points (for example, Mithra had maybe one or two companions, not twelve; nor is there any reference to Mithra dying and being resurrected).

      The article does make for a very good read, I suggest you open YOUR mind and check it out.
      • Charlotte_Web, on 03/20/2008, -3/+6BTW, The article ends with this conclusion: "In not one instance has Acharya made a convincing case that Christianity borrowed anything from Mithraism. The evidence is either too late, not in line with the conclusions of modern Mithraic scholars, or just plain not there."
      • dildoolielly, on 03/20/2008, -2/+5The guy that runs www.tektonics.org is full of ***** and most of the crap on his "Apologetics" site is not even considered by any biblical scholar I know of. The guy just makes ***** up and totally ignores complete lack of evidence.

        Long before Jesus, Dec. 25th was celebrated as the date of Mithra's birth. Mithra was also associated with the sun, and his followers marked Sunday as his day of worship, they called it the Lord's Day. A few of the extra-biblical traditions seem to have found its way to Christianity through Roman Mithraism.

        Among the milder ceremonies of the followers of Mithra were baptism in holy water and a partaking of a sacred meal of bread and wine. After passing several ordeals the converts were "reborn" as a new man in Mithra. Though Mithra had ascended into heaven he had promised to return and bring life everlasting to his loyal followers.

        With all the similarities of Mithra to Christ, there are some that say that Christianity came from Mithraism but that is just nonsense. For a time, the two religions co-existed together and even competed with each other but Christianity survived. At the same time, there could be prophetic questions here in prefiguring the true Son of God that would come later. There had been many Messianic types of Christ in the Jewish scriptures (David and Joseph for example) and God may have been telling Gentiles also, but this is merely conjecture and there are other religions with the same similarities. The Wise men from the east who visited Jesus were said to be Zorastrian.

        The similarities to New Testament Christianity cease upon a closer examination of Mithraism. They were a secret society, they had graded membership, women were excluded, Mithra is one of many gods and they had a separate priesthood called "Fathers."
        • Charlotte_Web, on 03/20/2008, -2/+3Well, you can attack the author of the site that I referenced, but there are similar articles from a variety of authors across the internet, so it doesn't have any real bearing on the discussion. What's salient in the article that I linked to is that he does the research, quotes the references, and shows how they are false (as opposed to you, who just wants to call him names as a refutation).

          With regards to Christmas... you have to understand that observation of the day of the birth of Christ is not commanded in scripture! It's just something that Christians do! In fact, most (if not all) biblical scholars would dispute that Jesus was born on December 25th, anyway. We don't know what day He was born, so whether we celebrate it on Dec 25th or April 15th or not at all, really has little to no impact on Christianity as defined by the New Testament. Yes, we celebrate Christmas on December 25th because Christianity overwhelmed a pagan religion and took over its holiday. Not a big deal in my mind.

          Sunday worship -- Jesus was resurrected on a Sunday, so why wouldn't the early church worship on Sunday? Worshipping on a Sunday also helped the church to move away from being labelled as a sect of Judaism. So, it's just a coincidence that Mithra may have also been worshipped on Sunday.

          Baptism isn't unique to the New Testament; read the Old Testament and you'll see ritual cleansing with water. Also read the Dead Sea Scrolls to see that other sects of Judaism practiced baptism during Jesus's time.

          And while we're at it, washing for ritual purity is common in many religions. Washing == cleanliness, it's not a huge symbolic leap to make. And yes, there are going to be some similar threads that happen to be common to MOST or ALL religions. The performing of miracles. The promise of redemption in the afterlife. Reconciliation with God. To say that Christianity stole such elements from Mithraism is absurd.

          In the end, the author shows (quite well and through various citations) how strained your comparison is between Mithraism and Christianity. Some of the assertions that you make simply have no reference -- they appear to be made up. Others were made through highly creative interpretations of a single passage or two. The Mithra == Jesus comparison utterly fails upon close inspection.
          • dildoolielly, on 03/20/2008, -2/+2And what about OSIRIS-DIONYSUS or HORUS? Easily forgotten, eh?

            Actually, the argument is mute and irrelevant because there is absolutely not one shred of evidence for a historical Jesus.

            So why don't you present what you feel is the best piece of evidence for an historical Jesus? There is not one single shred of evidence for the "Jesus" of the bible. Not one artifact or eyewitness account. Not even in the Bible

            Amazingly, we have not one Jewish, Greek, or Roman writer, even those who lived in the Middle East, much less anywhere else on the earth, who ever mentions him during his supposed life time. This appears quite extraordinary, and you will find few Christian apologists who dare mention this embarrassing fact.

            It’s quite easy to figure out what all this means.

            No more debates filled with fancy symantics, just back up your statments with actual scientific evidence.

          • Charlotte_Web, on 03/20/2008, -3/+3The best piece of evidence for the historical Jesus is contained in the following five books from the period: Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Acts. That's far more evidence than you'll find of any person who lived as a commoner 2,000 years ago.

            "Amazingly, we have not one Jewish, Greek, or Roman writer, even those who lived in the Middle East, much less anywhere else on the earth, who ever mentions him during his supposed life time."

            Why is that amazing? According to the four Gospels, the Jewish elders tried to silence him. And Greek or Roman writers -- how would they have known of him? Communication traveled much more slowly back then, and I believe the farthest north Jesus ever traveled was what we'd call southern Lebanon.

            Also keep in mind that Jesus's ministry was only 3 and 1/2 years.
          • dildoolielly, on 03/20/2008, -2/+2Even taking the closest estimates to Christ, Biblical scholars still say that Mark is the earliest Gospel and he wrote down what Peter, who was an apostle, said to him. None of the Gospel writers were eyewitnesses.

            Your combined ignorance is part of the problem. Your reluctance to question outside what a self-appointed man in fancy garb inside a fancy building told you.
          • Charlotte_Web, on 03/20/2008, -2/+3My ignorance? You just admitted that the Gospel of Mark was Peter's eyewitness account, and then dismissed it because it was transcribed! What kind of nonsense is that?

            As far as dating the gospels, there is no conclusive dates, only speculation. Liberal theologians argue for a later date, while conservatives prefer an earlier date. Regardless, the key point is that all of these books were either written by eyewitnesses, or transcribed from eyewitness accounts.

            If we were talking about any other person in the history of the human race, five books would be an open and shut case. But, because you are agenda-driven and want to fit the facts to your theory, it's not acceptable to you.
          • dildoolielly, on 03/20/2008, -2/+2-------------because you are agenda-driven and want to fit the facts to your theory, it's not acceptable to you.---------------

            Its not up to me to prove non-evidence. I am just restating what many historians are saying.

            Even the earliest Gospel, Mark, was probably written down by someone taking notes from speeches given by one of the Apostles - I think it was Peter. According to mainstream New Testament scholastic thought, none of the Gospels are eyewitness accounts.

            So WTF are you trying to prove? Wheres is your evidence for a historical Jesus? Are you hiding it somewhere? Is this a game?

            We can pretend all we want
          • Charlotte_Web, on 03/21/2008, -0/+2How is it that you automatically have a +2 to all of your posts? What, do you have a second account just to digg yourself up?

            "Even the earliest Gospel, Mark, was probably written down by someone taking notes from speeches given by one of the Apostles - I think it was Peter. According to mainstream New Testament scholastic thought, none of the Gospels are eyewitness accounts."

            Do you even listen to yourself? Peter was the eyewitness! If Mark transcribes the very words of Peter, then why is the story no longer valid in your eyes?

            You have yet to explain the logic of that to me.
        • aristotle0dude, on 03/22/2008, -0/+1dildoolielly, do you bother reading other people links or do you work on blind faith alone? Where are these written works from pre-Christian times detailing what you claim?
    • janyu86, on 03/20/2008, -8/+1"I read it on the internet. It must be true."

      You're an idiot.
  • moletimer, on 03/20/2008, -1/+5Thanks for the advice. I'll be sure to get my tetanus jab every time I want to ram rusty nails into my hands and feet : )
  • HadBeans, on 03/20/2008, -4/+6What cracks me up is that it is sponsored by Coco Cola for gods/allahs/vishnus/spaghetti monsters sake. What next? Iraq car bombing sponsored by Halliburton...... Oh sorry they already are.
  • dildoolielly, on 03/20/2008, -15/+25Time for another quiz, fundies!

    WHO WAS THIS GOD?

    - God was his father
    - He was born in a cowshed.
    - A human woman, a virgin, was his mother.
    - His birth was prophesized by a star in the heavens.
    - At a marriage ceremony, he performed the miracle of converting water into wine.
    - He was powerless to perform miracles in his hometown.
    - His followers were born-again through baptism in water.
    - He rode triumphantly into a city on a donkey. Tradition records that the inhabitants waved palm leaves.
    - He had 12 disciples.
    - He was accused of licentious behavior.
    - He was killed near the time of the Vernal Equinox, about MAR-21.
    - He died "as a sacrifice for the sins of the world."
    - He was hung on a tree, stake, or cross.
    - After death, he descended into hell.
    - On the third day after his death, he returned to life.
    - The cave where he was laid was visited by three of his female followers.
    - He later ascended to heaven.
    - His titles: God made flesh. Savior of the world Son of God.
    - He is "God made man," and equal to the Father.
    - He will return in the last days.
    - He will judge the human race at that time.
    - Humans are separated from God by original sin. The godman's sacrificial death reunites the believer with God and atones for the original sin.

    Did you guess Jesus Christ? Well, again you'd be WRONG!! HE WAS... OSIRIS-DIONYSUS, an Egyptian God who's story existed thousands of years before Christ allegedly came around

    • hmcook87, on 03/20/2008, -5/+1shazam! and he does it again.
    • ticookie, on 03/20/2008, -6/+5Wrong. You just blended together an Egyptian god of death and a Greek god of wine into one god.
    • aristotle0dude, on 03/22/2008, -2/+1How about giving a link to the site you copied and pasted it from? The only fundy I see is you. You make a lot of claims without evidence to back it up.
  • Dested, on 03/20/2008, -1/+5I half expected this to be on the onion. I thought, not gonna get fooled again.
  • NinjaPirateDude, on 03/20/2008, -2/+4im filipino, but i mean come on, seriously? nailing yourself to a frickin cross! who the hell is this stupid.............
    • gman0819, on 03/20/2008, -2/+0I'm also Filipino and I also think that it's crazy. But it's part of that town's culture and tradition.
    • diggdowner, on 03/20/2008, -0/+1I'm Filipino and atheist.

      Did I win??
  • wtfunkymonkey, on 03/20/2008, -5/+3Crucifixion, it's just not that big a deal.
    It's been 2000 years, get over it already.
  • dildoolielly, on 03/20/2008, -17/+11Last quiz, fundies!

    Ok Who is this GOD?

    Was born of the virgin on December 25th in a manger, with his birth being announced by a star in the East and attended by three wise men.
    He was a child teacher in the Temple and was baptized when he was 30 years old.
    Was also baptized.
    He had 12 disciples.
    He performed miracles and raised a man, from the dead.
    He walked on water.
    Was transfigured on the Mount.
    He was crucified, buried in a tomb and resurrected.
    He was also the "Way, the Truth, the Light, the Messiah, God's Anointed Son, the Son of Man, the Good Shepherd, the Lamb of God, the Word" etc.
    He was "the Fisher," and was associated with the Lamb, Lion and Fish.45
    Personal epithet was "Iusa," the "ever-becoming son" of "Ptah," the "Father."46
    Was called "the KRST," or "Anointed One,"

    If you guessed Jesus Christ, well, YOU'D BE WRONG!! HE WAS... HORUS, who's legend existed hundreds of years before the Christ tale.

    http://www.truthbeknown.com/origins.htm
    • moonguidex, on 03/20/2008, -6/+12I'm an atheist, but even I'm bothered by these quizzes that you're posting. I hope you are a teenager, because it is the only time in your life that you're allowed to be this self righteous.
      Learn some respect.
      • dildoolielly, on 03/20/2008, -12/+8Sorry but Intelligent, educated, well-rounded, scholarly, non-superstitious, non-threatening, critical-thinking, balanced, emotionally & mentally healthy and socially stable people require historical evidence and scientific observation to make logical decisions.

        Untruths, mistruths are nothing but distractions to historical fact. People who are capable of intelligent debate, and not prone to "magical thinking" (one of the hallmarks of mental illness and psychosis) should confront such ludicrous claims especially when those psychotic beliefs begin to turn into laws and campaign platforms, you've overstepped the boundry separating church from state.

        Reasonable, logical thinking people shouldn't have to tip toe through Christian's psychotic brand of *****!

        Don't expect graciousness
        • ryeland, on 03/20/2008, -4/+7First off to quote timelines for legendary development is just silly. The story of christ well predates his birth. Read the old testament of the bible, Jesus is mentioned through out. Many prophets well before his birth prophesied of his coming. So is it possible that the roman-persian gods are actually based off of the same prophecies? It is within the realm of possibility ( I am not saying it is likely, but it is possible). Secondly using phrases the "anointed one" and the "Son of God" as proof is erroneus. We TRANSLATED those sayings into various languages to be told various cultures. It makes sense that you would use the various sayings of those cultures that would best describe what you are talking about. So in english, when you say "Son of God" everyone knows what you mean, you have heard the saying and you take it to mean "Messiah" or "Jesus" or "Savior" or "Anointed One". These are all sayings that have a very specific connection to a very specific belief. Of course people who translate these other mythos into english are going to use those sayings, because it is a very concise and accurate way to get your point across. Language is about being lazy, using rules and sayings made by other people to get your point across efficiently.

          Furthermore a superiority complex is also often the sign of a mental condition. I firmly support your rights to your beliefs and your right to criticize other people's (including mine). However to believe that you are smart because you don't believe and i am dumb and psychotic because I believe is hypocrisy pure and simple.

          You want to be respected for your logic and open mind? Show some open mindedness and respect. As long as you remain respectful you can make all the criticisms you want.
          • MacParrot, on 03/20/2008, -3/+2"Don't expect graciousness"
            You must have missed that part of dildo's post. Being gracious, well rounded, having an open mind, or respectful isn't what he does very well. It is sad and maybe when he grows up he'll do better.
          • dildoolielly, on 03/20/2008, -0/+3------------------"The story of christ well predates his birth. Read the old testament of the bible, Jesus is mentioned through out. Many prophets well before his birth prophesied of his coming."-----------------------------

            JUST THE FACTS, MAAM!

            -NO eyewitness account to the Jesus claim. Not ONE (not even in the Bible!)

            -NO archaeological evidence, not ONE ancient work found that mentions Jesus

            -The Jesus story copies many direct attributes from earlier religions and the similarities early Christianity shares with then-contemporary religion and mythology is staggering.

            When you can show eyewitness to the Jesus claim and/or archaeological evidence, I'm all ears

          • ryeland, on 03/21/2008, -0/+0This just in: Early Christianity holds similarity to other religions. Perhaps this is a result of the fact that all early christians were CONVERTS. Christianity did not exist before Christ, there were no born and raised christians at the time. It is very hard for people to give up life long customs. So you think the transition from other beliefs to christianity is a two hour affair eh? You don't think they would have held onto their old and beloved traditions and stories? So the staggering similiarities you claim to have make sense now don't they.

            As far as eye witness testimony to jesus we need to look at the timeline. The book of Luke was written some 30 years after christ died, so it would have been written while people who had personally seen jesus were still alive. So if there had been rampant falsehoods evident it would have been immediately decried by those people. Though it is possible it survived even being false, and i am willing to admit that.

            No archaeological evidence eh. what about the shroud of turin? No, nothing. I am not implying that it is not some elaborate forgery, but that is some evidence of him. In the writings of Josephus, a non christian historian from the time. There are some questions about the authenticity of the records of his writings, but that is true of all historical texts.

            So keep your mind open. That is the only thing i will recommend. Do not only look at the views that support yours, but explore the ones that are polar opposites.
        • dildoolielly, on 03/20/2008, -7/+5-------------You want to be respected for your logic and open mind? Show some open mindedness and respect. --------------

          It doesnt matter what I call you or how rude you are to me, it means nothing in the whole scheme of things. It is meaningless.

          What matters is evidence or lack thereof. You come to the table with absolutely zero evidence for your astonishing, mystical, mythical "Bible-God" claims, tell me not to question your "faith" while embeding your filth into our political process while establishing law and you expect graciousness?

          Are magical invisible green elephants who control the universe from their homes inside doorknobs any less real in the minds of psychopaths in insane asylums?

          Believe whatever you like, but if you want me to believe it then provide evidence or expect mockery and ridicule. Do not expect polite debate. Religion has been given too much liberty to murder and enslave humans while hidden in the garb of "Faith". It and whoever believes it does not deserve to pick the fecal matter from my ass. Politeness is out the door by far by now. I don't give a damn what brand of ***** anyone believes until those beliefs begin to turn into laws and campaign platforms, you've overstepped the boundry separating church from state. Thats what happening in this country. Don't expect politeness.

          And why don't you present what you feel is the best piece of evidence for the biblical jesus? There is not one single shred of evidence for the "Jesus" of the bible. Not one artifact or eyewitness account. Not even in the Bible

          No more debates filled with fancy symantics, just back up your statments with actual scientific evidence or STFU!
        • JBish828, on 03/20/2008, -4/+2-------------You want to be respected for your logic and open mind? Show some open mindedness and respect. --------------
          Believe whatever you like, but if you want me to believe it then provide evidence or expect mockery and ridicule.

          Facts and stories aside, isn't this kind of backward?
        • moonguidex, on 03/20/2008, -3/+5Just one more thing for you to "rationalize". Religions are not responsible for wars and whatever else you mention. INTOLERANCE between, and against religions are the cause for conflicts. Your lack of "graciousness" has been the cause of all the religious conflicts, not the religions by themselves. You are proof of this feeling of superiority that atheists sometimes have which is equal to the fundamentalism from the religions that you seem to hate. In the end, whatever your faith or lack of, the importance of acting respectfully towards religious or non religious people will be bounced back towards you. If you really want people to hear what you have to say, act in such a way that people want to make an example of you. This, unfortunately, involves "grace", and respect for EVERYONE.
          • dildoolielly, on 03/20/2008, -3/+2Blind faith and refusal to consider people who demand evidence and have beliefs based in science and evidence as humans is probably the scariest ***** in the world.

            Beliefs based on blind faith are utterly irrelevant. You can believe that cows came from outer space, that aliens created the universe, that people reincarnate into other life forms after death, or that a half-man, half god was sent by his father (and himself) to die for threee days and return to a place called "heaven"...

            You can believe ANY of these propositions but your believing them does NOT make them true or real. So it is wild conjecture at BEST.

            If what's true for you is not true for me there is no truth in it. Truth is an absolute, not some wishy washy idea. To say we have to believe in a "god" because we can't "disprove" a god is ludicrous. If this were the case, then we would have to believe in every single figment of mankind's collective imagination, such as Santa or the Toothfairy because we cannot truly "disprove" their existance either. What you think is a logical way of thinking actually fringes on the psychotic.

            We are driven to war after war, violence on top of violence to appease madmen who believe in gory mythologies.These men are called Christians, Muslims and Jews.

            It is because Christians (people of all faith) hold a belief about the world that they can't justify, yet they are willing to dedicate their lives to it. Even in the face of contradicting evidence and arguments that conclude God can not exist you will still believe.

            Do you consider that an intellectually honest decision?
          • moonguidex, on 03/20/2008, -2/+2That has nothing to do with what I wrote. You are clearly disturbed. You apparently have all this drivel memorized, and it seems to me that these aren't even your ideas.
            Seek help.
          • dildoolielly, on 03/20/2008, -2/+3Moderates like to distance themselves from extremists by pointing out that these extremists don't represent the majority of christians, but they fail to explain why the majority of christians don't take exception to the actual texts of the bible. Nor do they present any coherent argument as to how they came to chose which parts of the bible are to be take literally and which are metaphorical lessons. The problem is not, as so many like to say, that a few extremists get things wrong, its that these extremists get things right... biblically speaking that is.

            Moderates need to admit that the bible is a human text that expresses moral and ethical viewpoints that are several thousand years out of date. Until they do, they need to live with the stink that the biblical literalists bring.

            So if you aren't an gaybashing hate-mongering Christian, good for you. However, your leaders all are; that's why we generalize, because the face of Christianity in this country is bigoted, anti-science, and repressive in general. Choose better leaders that espouse intelligence and acceptance, and we won't all think you're dumb assholes.
          • moonguidex, on 03/20/2008, -2/+2All right, no reasoning with you, so piss off.
          • dildoolielly, on 03/20/2008, -0/+3---------"All right, no reasoning with you, so piss off."------------


            Its funny seeing Christians get pissed off with lack of evidence for the mythical Jesus. When you piss them off they start cursing like whorehouse bouncers. Even better yet, they don't recognize any irony in it.
          • moonguidex, on 03/20/2008, -2/+1Again, not a Christian, but I am interested in your radical *****, so please, keep telling me about it...
      • enmand, on 03/20/2008, -5/+6I'm with moonguidex on this one. They offended me, and I'm not Christian (or religious). What point was there to these, other than to offend people that did nothing to you except believe something you don't? Get over yourself.

        You want "reasonable, logical thinking"? Take a course in Philosophy of Religion, or read a book. (Kant's Dialogs Natural Religion is good, as is a book simply entitled "Philosophy of Religion".) Clearly smarter people than you have thought about this.
        • enmand, on 03/20/2008, -4/+3Sorry, that's Hume's Dialogues Natural Religion, not Kant's... but Kant does have some good writings concerning religion.
        • dildoolielly, on 03/20/2008, -6/+4NOTHING positive to any of the societies Christianity infects correlates to Christianity.

          Christians commit the vast majority of all crime in the United States.

          And let us not forget Christianity's long, bloody history...

          The Crusades

          The 500 years of Inquisitions

          The pillage, rape, torture and murder of the Aztecs

          The murder of every Indian on Cuba

          The genocide against the American Indian

          The worlds' most famous Christian Adolf Hitler and his Christian Nazis, the 6 million they killed in the Holocaust, and the 35 million who died as a result of the World War they launched

          Christian-sponsored genocide in Rwanda

          Jim Jones and his Kool-Aid Party

          David Koresh

          It's time to end the madness, folks.
          • MacParrot, on 03/20/2008, -4/+3Joseph Stalin, who murdered an estimated 15 million prior to WW2 in purges and farm collective created starvation and millions afterwards as well would probably agree with you dildo. Yes, madness is certainly only in the religious.
          • dildoolielly, on 03/20/2008, -2/+4Perhaps it would be less confusing if you replaced the word "non-religious" with "Bright" - ie. not just someone who doesn't believe in a God but someone who subscribes to a completely naturalistic, rational world view. Stalin does not fall into that category.

            And get over it, there's no such thing as "Atheism" any more than there is "aHinduism" or "aHubbardism". Lack of belief is not a belief. It's a word made up by believers to smear the non-. There also isn't "evolutionism" -- it's not a belief system.

            However, there should be a "Christianism". Funny how the real "ism" doesn't label itself with a belief suffix
        • moonguidex, on 03/20/2008, -4/+2Those are great books, one that I might recommend is Karen Armstrong's "A History of God". The book treats God as a historical entity from the beginning of humanity to present day. Quite interesting, especially for non christians, as it touches on a lot of the social aspects of religion which contributed (for benefit or otherwise) to how we act as a society today...
          • dildoolielly, on 03/20/2008, -4/+3---------"Quite interesting, especially for non christians, as it touches on a lot of the social aspects of religion which contributed (for benefit or otherwise) to how we act as a society today..."-------------

            I do need some advice from you, regarding some elements of God's Laws and how to follow them.

            1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

            2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

            3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanness - Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

            4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

            5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2. clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

            6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?

            7. Lev.21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?

            8 . Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though Lev. 19 expressly forbids this: 27. How should they die?

            9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

            10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair? (Lev. 20:14)

            11. Are magical invisible green elephants who control the universe from their homes inside doorknobs any less real in the minds of psychopaths in insane asylums?
            ------------------------

            I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

          • moonguidex, on 03/20/2008, -3/+3Wow, I think you're the first psycho I ever interact with. Someday you will say the wrong thing to the wrong person and you will reap the benefits of your intolerance.
            Have a good day.
          • dildoolielly, on 03/20/2008, -2/+3-------Wow, I think you're the first psycho I ever interact with. Someday you will say the wrong thing to the wrong person and you will reap the benefits of your intolerance.-----------

            Thats the thing I hate the most about religion is there is no debate, you are 'not allowed to talk about it'. Yeah, isn't that what a child molester tells his victims too?

            You are obviously either intellectually dishonest or simply not smart enough to carry on an honest and intelligent debate.


          • moonguidex, on 03/20/2008, -2/+3As I said from the beginning, I am an atheist, so your pro no god argument doesn't fit. What I am trying to correct you on is your manners, and respect.
            This has been entertaining, however. Please, tell me more.
    • godfly, on 03/20/2008, -4/+7Some people are so open minded their brains fall out.

      I'm referring to you dildooliely
      • dildoolielly, on 03/20/2008, -4/+3Your "response" is not a rebuttal. Please respond to my points, or don't respond at all. These ad hominem attacks only give the impression that you disagree because you want to. If you have any disagreements with what I said, state them. Otherwise, would you be so kind as to not click "Submit Comment" next time? Thank you.
  • Matt174e, on 03/20/2008, -3/+3"Re-enactments of the Passion of Christ are common in many parts of the mostly Roman Catholic Philippines but frowned upon by the church authorities."

    Do they realize that Mel Gibson didn't write this story?
  • linkerjpatrick, on 03/20/2008, -6/+6I'm sorry but as a Christian I want to say this is one of the dumbest things people do to "satisfy their soul". The whole point of Christ dying on the cross was to take on the burdens of sinners and to be the final sacrifice. Acts such as this cheapen grace and what Christ did. I don't care if this sound intolerant but if you know the point of why Christ willingly went to the cross then things like this are actually against it.
    • skektek, on 03/20/2008, -4/+1This isn't Christians practicing this, it's Catholics. Catholicism is a hybrid of Paganism and Christianity.
      • gman0819, on 03/20/2008, -0/+1So Catholics are not Christians? That's what they made you to believe.
    • hmcook87, on 03/20/2008, -1/+6true that. Jesus dying for the sins of the world is an excellent example of a phenomenon known as "scapegoating". This was common in ancient times when people would symbolically place the sins of their tribe on a goat and then drive the animal off into the desert to die of thirst, thereby allowing the tribe's sins to be forgiven. The story of Jesus takes this one step further by using a horrific human sacrifice in place of the goat. Christians view this is one of the greatest moral actions of all time, but in reality the idea of Jesus dying for everyone's sins is rather abhorrent as it removes responsibility from the guilty and places it on the innocent. Would it be moral to send an innocent person to prison to pay for the crimes of another?

      Of course Jesus died not so much for sins committed by everyday humans, but for a specific sin, the "original sin" of Adam and Eve, fictional characters from the book of Genesis, who were set up by God to inevitably fail. Not only does God conspicuously place a very tasty looking apple tree right in the middle of the garden, he tells them not to eat the fruit, knowing full well that saying this will only make the pair want to try the apples more. To make matters work he places a (talking) snake in the garden who he allows to mislead them and talk them into eating the apple. After the deed is done God shows up, after his mysterious absence during the snake's speech, and gets all pissed off and starts handing out punishments. Now, since this story never actually happened (a talking snake? really?), Jesus was brutally executed because a fictional character ate an apple at the beginning of time. In addition to this, the sacrifice was unnecessary anyway, as an all powerful God could easily forgive the sins of humanity, without anyone having to be brutally murdered. Unless God just enjoyed watching Jesus die. If you read the old testament, you will see it would hardly be out of character. Oh yea, greatest moral action of all time. Christians of course will have come up with at least half a dozen excuses by now, or perhaps wont even have made it to the end of the comment, outraged that I would dare to write a frank criticism of their ideas.
    • dildoolielly, on 03/21/2008, -0/+3------------I'm sorry but as a Christian I want to say this ....-----------------

      A "reasonable Christian" is like a naked man standing in the snow who knows that he is cold, accepts the fact that he is suffering, admits that the weatherman was correct in his forecast, realizes that others are questioning his behavior, but inexplicably ignores his lack of clothes.
  • DestroyFascism, on 03/20/2008, -1/+5Crucifixion? Good! line to the left, one cross only....
    • MacParrot, on 03/20/2008, -0/+2That part of MP Life of Brian really cracked me up. The part that was even better was when one person in line (A Pythoner who's name escapes me at the moment) when asked if he was there to be crucified says, "No, I was set free." The questioner says "Really?" and the person in question says, "No, I'm just kidding. Crucifixion."
  • RATTVIK71, on 03/20/2008, -2/+3Anybody who does this at their own free will must have problems. Because nobody in their right mind would be crucified in this modern times
    • hmcook87, on 03/20/2008, -0/+3they're christians, hardly in their right mind.
  • zen4444, on 03/20/2008, -6/+7Ok someone's got to say it: Christianity is bad for you!
  • faithlessphil, on 03/20/2008, -0/+12It's really hard to give context to this event. Even those of us who were born and raised in the Philippines are baffled by what goes on here in the name of penitence.

    Catholicism was brought here as a means of subjugating the native population. The end goal was to pacify the population, to teach them the religion with a greater focus on the belief that we begin in a sinful condition, and that we must spend our lives trying to make up for our inherent sinfulness. For many people in the country, especially outside the larger, more secular cities, this is the only form of Catholicism they've ever known.

    It started out with just one guy, of course, but somehow, it caught on. Devotion, no matter how grotesque, can often be compelling, and people started making pilgrimages to San Fernando. It actually became a tourist attraction, which is one of the most twisted things I can imagine. Foreigners flocked to the country, some of them devotees, others just satiating a morbid curiosity. And for many of the poor people who live in that area, I imagine they saw it as an opportunity to make things a little better for themselves. So they built it up. It became a spectacle, an event, a festival of culture.

    For some of those people, they really do believe they're doing something beautiful and grand. Some of them are just there to get paid, or to get noticed, or for other reasons that can only be thought of as failings of the society at large. The Catholic Church could always step in, send a letter or something telling these devotees that crucifixion is not the way, but at this stage, it's probably too late. This is beyond religion now.
    • gman0819, on 03/20/2008, -1/+2Finally, someone who makes sense. If you're not Filipino, you will not understand why people do this. People do it as part of their devotion during Lent. Remember that the Philippines is a poor country and most people only have their religious beliefs, be it Catholicism or Protestantism. They think that by doing these things, their sins will be cleansed and their all their prayers will be answered. The Catholic Church disagrees but still they do it, because again, it's tradition and it already became a "tourist attraction". Sad, but hey, it's their tradition so you just have to respect it.

      • xmkatx, on 03/20/2008, -1/+2I'm Filipino but I don't think it will be hard for non-Filipinos to understand this. I don't think these people need to be criticized for showing their devotions this way, as long as they are not being forced to do it or are doing it for the wrong reasons.
  • skektek, on 03/20/2008, -0/+5Happy Zombie Jesus Day!
  • GunOfSod, on 03/20/2008, -0/+3We need this to become a much more widespread practise. The gene pool needs a good clean out.
  • nobelief, on 03/20/2008, -5/+1i've seen it before. it's creepy as hell, but it's a special experience
  • OrangeyTang, on 03/20/2008, -0/+1I never did manage to get that final nail in.
  • mrhorseshoe, on 03/20/2008, -2/+2I'm a Filipino-American and I'm disgusted by this. To think that these people are so fanatical about a foreign religion brought in by their Spanish conquerers to the point of crucifying and mutilating themselves... I just have to hang my head in shame.
  • dildoolielly, on 03/20/2008, -0/+6IF YOU LIKED THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST, your kids are gona love the violence in the book of LEVITICUS

    Gay-bashing, daughter-selling, animal-burning, sinner-stoning... It is delightfully evil and violent!

    http://www.Evilbible.com
    • Cerebron, on 03/20/2008, -1/+0Generally not condoned, just historical accounts or interesting narratives.
  • araza13, on 03/20/2008, -1/+1already dugg this yesterday.....must have got lost.......
  • ticookie, on 03/20/2008, -6/+5You all are retards. Making fun of someone else's culture because they celebrate Holy Week in a much deeper fashion? You can all go to your Zorastrianism hell.
    • hmcook87, on 03/20/2008, -1/+4"a deeper fashion" is that what you call pretending to crucify yourself?
  • nitemonkey, on 03/20/2008, -2/+1What a revelation!
    Get it - revelation(s).
    ***** I'm good.
  • ranirastabout, on 03/20/2008, -0/+3"I'm a true believer, I can stand the pain, the spirit of Christ will pervade me, I will be o... ARGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH THAT REALLLY HURTS!!!!!!1!!!!!" - Jose, Filipino Christian
  • SharkyTech, on 03/20/2008, -1/+2Who needs religion to enjoy self-harm? Razor-blades for everyone!
  • PueSi, on 03/20/2008, -1/+6They're not hurting anybody but themselves, let them be.
    It's not like they're stoning people to death or bombing abortion clinics, they're just showing their faith in a wacky way.
    Jews circumcise and nobody says *****...
    • Suricou, on 03/20/2008, -0/+2A few people do object. But they do so very, very quietly for fear of being associated with a well-known antisemitic dictator. Noone wants to criticise jews in any way - it violates the rules of political correctness.
  • protogenxl, on 03/20/2008, -0/+3Crucification is Bad, You shouldn't crucify your self M'Kay
  • DarkDragon, on 03/20/2008, -4/+3Natural Selection at work?
  • JBish828, on 03/20/2008, -0/+2"It is also better to bring self-prepared foods such as sandwiches, not only to save money, but also to avoid getting diseases such as diarrhea, hepatitis A, and typhoid after eating food bought from street vendors,” the health secretary suggested.
    • Testiculese, on 03/20/2008, -0/+3Yep, that's God looking out for the believers!
  • Testiculese, on 03/20/2008, -4/+2Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

    That's great. I totally encourage this. Fantastic entertainment!
  • chrgrose, on 03/20/2008, -1/+2So much for the christian idea that "But only JEBUS would suffer such pain for yous!"
  • JesusHatesYou, on 03/20/2008, -0/+4Jesus DIED for your sins. Don't be half-assed about it and finish the job!
  • JargonScott, on 03/20/2008, -1/+2What's funny though is how many people from 1st World countries that are pierced to the gills, stick D-cell batteries in their earlobes, do that suspension thing where they hang from rings on their backs, etc. People see that and either go "dude rock!" or "pfft, freak" and that's it. This doesn't sound any more horrific than any of that stuff, yet just because it has a religious undertone people whip out a "thin the gene pool" mentality?
  • andyd273, on 03/20/2008, -1/+3As a Christian, I have to say that this is stupid.
    Christ took the punishment so we don't have to, which makes this just pride ("I get to be like Jesus"), which is a sin.
    ignorant saps.
  • argusbargus, on 03/20/2008, -0/+3Jesus walks into a motel. He throws a bag of nails on the counter and says, "Can you put me up for the night?"
  • phatmatt626, on 03/20/2008, -0/+2Additionally, you shouldn't drink poison
  • Deived, on 03/20/2008, -0/+2Uhh... why?
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 54 of 54 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.