5 Things You Won't Believe Aren't In the Bible
#2.
The Antichrist
Type "Is Obama" into Google and one of the top three suggested searches will always be "the Antichrist?" If the Web had existed in Ronald Reagan's day, you'd have gotten the same result for him and (likewise for Mikhail Gorbachev).
Hot Antichrist-on-Antichrist action.
So clearly there is a huge chunk of the world waiting for someone to come along and fulfill the old biblical prophecy: A charismatic leader will fool the whole world, rise to power, institute a worldwide dictatorial regime and (finally) bring about the Apocalypse. There exist entire religious sects who keep a sharp eye out for the smooth talking sign of the End Times who will trigger the destruction of everything we know and love.
You skeptics can laugh, but know that many Americans who vote in 2012 will be doing it based on which of the two candidates is least likely to be the Antichrist.
This man is not basing his vote on sound fiscal policy.
The Only Problem Is ...
The Antichrist is mentioned only four times in the Bible, and each time he's described the same way:
"Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the Antichrist." (2 John 1:7)
Yep: The Antichrist is anyone who doesn't believe in Christ. The "anti" is basically being used the same way it's used when we say someone is "anti-war." So anyone who wants to accuse Richard Dawkins of being the Antichrist is actually entirely correct, and what's more, he'll agree with you.
Man, antichrists get all the fine bitches.
Actually Came From:
There are characters in the Book of Revelation who will help usher in the End of Days: for instance, there is a False Prophet, who looks like a lamb and talks like a dragon (figuratively, we're assuming). And then we have "The Beast" from Revelation 13, which is described as "coming out of the sea" with 10 horns, seven heads, 10 crowns and other body parts that do not even resemble a human body accidentally.
The Beast we're talking about is the beast on the right.
The beast is who is associated with the number 666, by the way. It wasn't until the second century that some dude named Saint Irenaeus started calling it the Antichrist, borrowing the term from another part of the Bible that wasn't referring to it. But even that did very little to change the fact that The Beast would have a hell of a time getting elected to public office since it looked like ... well, a motherfucking beast.
If Napoleon Dynamite wrote a fan-version of Narnia.
It wasn't until the Middle Ages that the Antichrist was portrayed as a guy rather than a huge multiheaded monster. Thus the Antichrist, as a figure in pop culture and cheap-shot accusation was born. Countless novels (like the worldwide bestselling Left Behind series) and movies have helped push the concept to where it is today.
So to summarize, millions are awaiting what they believe is the fulfillment of an ancient biblical prophecy that is in reality cobbled together from at least three different characters from the Bible, with a little bit of Rosemary's Baby for good measure.
#1.
Hell: Everything Other Than the Fire
Hell is a place of eternal torment, a realm of unrelenting suffering for all sinners, heretics and unbelievers. It is a land of fire and brimstone arranged into nine circles and filled with imps and demons who deal out cruelly ironic punishments for all of eternity. Ruling over all of it is Satan, who probably sits on a throne made of skulls or something.
We'd be more impressed by an armchair of femurs.
The Only Problem Is ...
Of all that, the only part you'll find in the Bible is the fact that Hell sucks and that there is fire (from passages like Matthew 13:42: "And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.")
And ... that's as specific as it gets.
Actually Came From:
As usual, artists and writers took those vague descriptions and ran with them. The understanding of hell as a fiery subterranean cavern full of lava and demons shoving flutes up your ass for eternity owes its popularity largely to the medieval double-team of Dante and Hieronymus Bosch.
Dante's Inferno popularized the idea of hell as a nine-level first-person-shooter. He pioneered the concept of contrapasso, the idea that prisoners of hell are subject to ironic tortures related to the sins that brought them there. Like the "flatterers," who spent their lives bullshitting, and were forced in hell to "wallow in shit" for eternity.
Then the Dutch artist, Bosch, came along and painted it.
Image #558 in our "pictures to stare at while on acid" series.
As for Satan being the ruler of hell, that's a misconception we can probably blame on John Milton. In Paradise Lost, Satan famously bitched: "Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven." But there's a reason why God cast Satan and his minions into hell instead of Wisconsin: Hell sucks for everyone including imps and demons. According to 2 Peter 2:4: "God did not spare the angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell, putting them into chains of darkness to be held for judgment."
That's right, chains and prisons ... for them. No iron fortresses, no fiery thrones, no mention of Satan ruling the cell block ... all of that is from the Bible's extended universe and fan fiction.
"And then, Boba Fett and Jesus Christ flew off on their divine jetpacks to fight the Nazis."
To see what else you are so wrong about, check out 6 Things From History Everyone Pictures Incorrectly and 5 Fictional Stories You Were Taught in History Class.
And stop by Linkstorm to find out whether or not Santa Claus was a saint or a creepy pedophile.
And don't forget to follow us on Facebook and Twitter to get sexy, sexy jokes sent straight to your news feed.
Do you have an idea in mind that would make a great article? Then sign up for our writers workshop! Do you possess expert skills in image creation and manipulation? Mediocre? Even rudimentary? Are you frightened by MS Paint and simply have a funny idea? You can create an infograpic and you could be on the front page of Cracked.com tomorrow!
A lot of modern protestants who study Revelation say the beast represents the papacy, the heads and crowns representing individual popes. The amount of time the beast reigns for, they say, corresponds to the time the papacy 'ruled the earth.' So they would say the pope is the antichrist.
ReplyI didn't know that Joseph of Aramatheia was supposed to have brough it to England, and so I had always wondered why the hell we've been looking for a piece of Israeli tablewear in goddamn England.
ReplyI always just assumed it was a left-over from when England thought it ruled the world and so they just assumed they'd have it.
As with almost every single page on the internet that deals with [insert religion], retarded [insert religion] believers and a*****e atheists (or trolls in general) will unnecessarily spam the comments. I guess I really should expect that by now...
Reply"The Antichrist is anyone who doesn't believe in Christ. The "anti" is basically being used the same way it's used when we say someone is "anti-war.""
Wouldn't that mean someone who is actively against believing in Christ as opposed to simply not believing?
Considering the passage, I guess there is more Antichrists today than in the past, but I'm also guessing the reason is most likely because not being Christian doesn't result in your head being forcefully parted from your body and less likely because it's the end of days. Furthermore, because of the many, many ways the bible can be interpreted, even the "end of days" is questionable.
The great Lewis black once did a sketch where he complained how despite the Christians having a new testament (and calling ours old), he sees pastors weekly trying to interpret the old testament and always get it wrong...
ReplyI kind of thought this was going to be like the article "6 Animals You Won't Believe Are Related To Humans". (every single one by the way, so there was no need to list 6). In accordance with the way they handled that article, they could have just said,
Reply"5 Things You Won't Believe Aren't In The Bible"
1.Giraffes with talking penis heads
2.Snakes who crawl through your digestive system and turn to gold as they exit (either end)
3.Consistent storytelling (wait, this one's true)
4.Woman whom after being accidentally impregnated by cucumbers, rub their vagina 2 hours a day for 4 weeks and piss pineapple juice.......though I wasn't there, it could've happened.
5.Fathers who offer their daughters to rape-hungry mobs to save some strangers (sorry, this actually is in their) [Other than the known use of the name, this may have been the inspiration for one of my favorite rap groups, "Mobb Deep"]
The myths of "heaven", "hell" and "purgatory" are ripoffs of Greek mythology. Hades wasn't just the name of the Greek god, it was the name of the place. Hades (the place) had three areas: one for good people, one for so-so people and one for evildoers (e.g. Sisyphus). Hades (the god) oversaw all three parts and all people who were there.
ReplyMost things invented in chrsitian mythology were either ripoffs of other pre-existing myths (e.g. the ten condiments was ripped off from Sumeria and the Code Of Hammurabi) or attempts to incorporate and overwrite other myths, to ethnically cleanse local culture and religions (e.g. Eostre being corrupted into "easter", the Roman Valentinus rewritten as christian even though he wasn't).
well i guess im turning greek
3 places seems way easier to get into than 2
The Ten Condiments? Must be various ketchups and mustards of divine origin. I'd like some on a Holy Hamburger if you would.
This article is an example of the glip,flippant,misconstruing way that atheists think about Christian beliefs. Everything is explained in a naturalistic anthropological manner,rather than examined for truth. The early Christians did not claim to get all their beliefs from scripture alone,they had apostolic teachings that were passed on by word of mouth,and traditional Jewish beliefs. They belonged to an entity they called the Catholic Church. The mention of angels and Satan and the devils in scripture presumes that the readers already knew about them from traditional teaching. The parallels between pagan and Chrtistian beliefs about demons don't prove that the Christian beliefs are based only upon pagan beliefs,it only shows that both pagans and Christians knew about demons,the difference being that pagans worshipped demons as gods. The Jews and Christians knew that the pagan gods such as Baal and Beelzebub were really demons. So it was appropriate that Jews and Christians used pagan imagery of false gods to depict Satan and the demons. The Jews and Christians never said that the pagans were wrong to believe in the existence of demons,or that all pagan imagery was false,they were against worshipping the demons. And aside from the use pagan imagery,some Jews and Christians had seen angels and demons. It is stupid to attribute Christian beliefs to pagan sources as if religious beliefs can only have orginated from culture and not from experience and events of what is believed.
Reply Hide All See All 5 RepliesYou do know that this isnt the place for Religious Debates, right?
you,re on the internet, deal with other peoples opinions, dont like it dont read it
"Everything is explained in a naturalistic anthropological manner,rather than examined for truth." What the hell is wrong with a "naturalistic anthropological" way of examining things? It's called science, dude. Dammit, people like you make the rest of us Christians look like intelligence-hating pricks...
@joybus,
The naturalistic view is unjustifiable,because there is no reason to presume that only natural causes exist,even for scientific purposes. It is not necessary to hold a natualistic view of reality in order to do scientific research. Methodological naturalism is not science itself,it is the way scientists explain phenomena.
@AnthonyPuccetti,
There is some misunderstanding here. I'll admit it may be on my part because you insist that using unnecessarily obscure vocabulary to describe relatively uncomplicated concepts presumably because you assume that cumbersome nomenclature confers potency to your argument. But with all your capability in language, I think you've misconstrued the concept of science. Science (specifically the natural sciences like biology, physics, chemistry, etc) is based off of observation of the natural world. So if you take non-natural causes into account into your research, you've left the realm of science, and will lose all respect in your field. So contrary to your personal belief, methodological naturalism is pretty much the essence of science. Sure, you can be religious and still be a scientist (I'm a Catholic Electrical Engineer), but it's separation of church and work, dude.
"Image #558 in our "pictures to stare at while on acid" series."
ReplyThat picture is going in my collection. No joke.
This is one of the few times when NONE of the things listed were things I thought.
ReplyI went to Sunday school for several years, it would have a lot more badass if the above stuff was in the bible.
'As for the devil's famous habit of gambling with people's souls, that's not canonical either.'
Reply Hide All See All 3 RepliesFrom a Biblical perspective, one's soul is judged and ascends to Heaven or is cast into Hell upon death. The judgement is that of God and no other. Lucifer does try and tempt us into sin and a denial of Christ and scripture, but in the end, it's disbelief that condemns you. Think about it like this, if you are not a Christian, you are already damned for eternity. Why would the devil want to expose himself, i.e. Faust, Daniel Webster, and scare you out of his hands and into God's?
On the other hand, if you were a Christian, the mere fact that you've made a deal with the devil automatically means that he wins.
Well it's a good thing I don't plan on getting into the christian afterlife, the Elysian Fields tops Heaven any day. Even the Asphodel Meadows sound better and better with all the blind morons in your faith.
There is, of course, the Philological and and Logical argument that an Christian that does good deeds won't get into heaven, because his deeds are not selfless, as he is doing them for reward, while an Atheist doing the same deeds will get to heaven because he is expecting nothing for them.
Edit: Did you know the Christianity is the only religion which has the idea of Eternal hell?
Cougarchats，C0M is a popular cougar dating site that makes your online dating journey fun and exciting. The cougars and young men at Cougarchats,C0M are seeking for friendship, dates, romance and even marriage
Replyi am now having an urge to write a fanfiction about jesus and boba fett
ReplyI swear half the negative commenters are Jeevoahs Witnesses
ReplyThe number of the beast 666...apparently this was a miss translation it should be 616
ReplyIt depends. 616 is the Greek, and 666 is the Latin. Numerically, they each stand for Nero--the guy killing all the Christians when Revelation was written, so it makes sense for him to be the anti-christ.
@ joybus. It especially makes sense when you think of "the beast" as Rome itself, it's "seven hills" the beast's seven heads, 666 as Nero, etc., etc. While looking at it that way, the whole story is just a clever way of the persecuted Christians to "talk shit" on their persecutors because you couldn't just put out a story saying "Rome sucks, and the Emperor is a crazy sadist ass, and one day we're gonna run this shit".
(I've liked reading your comments, it's always great to see people who don't see religious faith and open-mindedness as having to be enemies. And I am not a 'believer', but I'm not an 'anti-believer' either)
A lot Christians should know that these aren't in the Bible already. I know that's stereotypical, but Most of these are actually in the Bible, they are just not referred to their common names. Like the anti-Christ is in the Bible, but he's described as one who everyone follows but is teaching falseness and is not good.
ReplyI know most of these though.
ReplyAnd man, 'Beelzebub'? Isn't just that the name of an anime character?
sounds a whole lot more like a pokimon character haha. "beelzebub uses hellfire! its super effective!"
No, Beelzebub is the ancient Hebrew word for devil. It literally means "Lord of the Flies".
Most of these I knew. I never really thought about the antichrist one like how it's explained here though, I was with many others in thinking that it would be one person. It makes sense though since anti just means against.
ReplyHe is wrong about Hell. Revelations says that Jesus will personally operate the torture chamber in hell, the "wine press" that people will be put on.
ReplyHe also doesnt nearly go far enough with the Satan/devil explanation. Satan in the Hebrew Bible is just "the opposer", so anyone can be the opposer (like his section on the antichrist). The "fallen angel" story in Isaiah where it talks about Lucifer is also not refering to Satan. Firstly, Lucifer means "son of the morning" and is the Greek translation of "Helel ben Shahar". In Canannite mythology "Shahar "was the god of the dawn and "Shalim" was the god of the dusk. So the story here appears to be a story refering to the son of Shahar, Helel, who tried to usurp his fathers thrown but fails as a kind of parable in the context the story is told. It could also be a reference to Venus, since it was considered a star (hence also why the dawn and the dusk were gods), which each day tries and fails to get as high into the sky as the other stars. Jesus is also called Lucifer at one point in the New Testament.
The New Testament on the other hand really does anthropomorphize Satan and does attribute the Lucifer story to Satan as well, even though it never meant that originally. Beelzebub was a name given to Satan, but actually refers not to Satan but rather another Canaanite god, "Baal" or "Baalzebul" which incidently also features in an OT story. It was only later did all these names come to mean the same thing. ie. The Devil, Satan, Lucifer, Beelzebub when they were all originally different things.
It all sounds like irrational fear to me.
In line 5 you misspelled "referring", thus your whole argument is irrelevant
He is wrong about Hell. Revelations says that Jesus will personally operate the torture chamber in hell, the "wine press" that people will be put on.
ReplyHe also doesnt nearly go far enough with the Satan/devil explanation. Satan in the Hebrew Bible is just "the opposer", so anyone can be the opposer (like his section on the antichrist). The "fallen angel" story in Isaiah where it talks about Lucifer is also not refering to Satan. Firstly, Lucifer means "son of the morning" and is the Greek translation of "Helel ben Shahar". In Canannite mythology "Shahar "was the god of the dawn and "Shalim" was the god of the dusk. So the story here appears to be a story refering to the son of Shahar, Helel, who tried to usurp his fathers thrown but fails as a kind of parable in the context the story is told. It could also be a reference to Venus, since it was considered a star (hence also why the dawn and the dusk were gods), which each day tries and fails to get as high into the sky as the other stars. Jesus is also called Lucifer at one point in the New Testament.
The New Testament on the other hand really does anthropomorphize Satan and does attribute the Lucifer story to Satan as well, even though it never meant that originally. Beelzebub was a name given to Satan, but actually refers not to Satan but rather another Canaanite god, "Baal" or "Baalzebul" which incidently also features in an OT story. It was only later did all these names come to mean the same thing. ie. The Devil, Satan, Lucifer, Beelzebub when they were all originally different things.
It detracts somewhat from what you say when you do not know that the book is called "The Revelation of John," not "Revelations."
i loved the bible's extended universe and fan fiction part lol
Reply