A case for religion, and against AA.

[OverVolt]

Religious people may be all the things you say, it still doesn't make it real. What are my messed up core beliefs?

I don't think religion is a crutch. Where did you learn that from? Think about it.

It definitely wasn't in World Religions 101.

 

[Retro Rob]

Sound familiar?

It does, like that book you wrote 17 years ago. Btw, how about that link to it?

 

[Retro Rob]

No, not true. I've actually read quite a bit about similarities between the story of jesus and other, older religions.

Marvelous. I've read quite a bit about similarties between white men and child porn.

But many of the similarities are eerily similar.

As I stated, there is no "anup" in Egyptian Mythology. That means those similarites aren't as close as you're assuming...as they can only be "eerily" similar if there is proof that mythological religions actually believed in the person whom Jesus is being compared to.

Can I prove that ancient Israelites stole that information?

I knew you couldn't before you even posted that stuff.

No, I absolutely cannot.

At least you're being honest.

But that never was my point, my point is for open minded people to think about it...

Right, and I thought about it, looked it up, and proved some of it is bull****.

You assume open-minded people are gonna start doubting their religion based on a couple spurious links from random websites that an obvious atheist posted as "evidence".

No, what open-minded people do is test your "evidence" to see if it holds up, and there are more than just the "anup" that doesn't appear in Egyptian mythology...I just posted that one example so that opened-minded people can question the valiidity of your "evidence".

 

[soulcougher73]

It does, like that book you wrote 17 years ago. Btw, how about that link to it?

/sigh

You are not even worth it anymore. Cant see your own errors or figure out analgoies makes it pointless to talk to you.

 

[Retro Rob]

/sigh

You are not even worth it anymore. Cant see your own errors or figure out analgoies makes it pointless to talk to you.

There's an ignore feature, and you can stop quoting and responding to me.

 

[AViking]

Egypt and Israel are tied historically in a significant way. That myth was easily at their disposal.

 

[AViking]

According to wikipedia the reference to Anup is a false one. So re-evaluate that source please.

Regardless there are similarities between Jesus and at least one Egyptian god.

These similarities are not supposed to be copies. Nothing is a copy of another. What they generally do is take two myths and put them together to form a new one. Sometimes they're rather subtle. In other cases they simply keep some of their older traditions, secularize them, and overlay a new belief system such as Christianity.

Sweden has lots of Pagan holidays yet we are not Pagan. We are Christian. Out with the old, in with the new, but keep some of the old to make it easier to swallow.

Look at Voodoo as a great example of the merging of two religions.

 

[SlowSpyder]

I don't think religion is a crutch. Where did you learn that from? Think about it.

It definitely wasn't in World Religions 101.

What are my messed up atheist core beliefs?

 

[Retro Rob]

Egypt and Israel are tied historically in a significant way. That myth was easily at their disposal.

True, but that's not the question...it's "did they use it"? At the end of the day, we can decide for ourselves.

Just because something is easily at my disposal, is in no way evidence that I used it.

 

[SlowSpyder]

True, but that's not the question...it's "did they use it"? At the end of the day, we can decide for ourselves.

Just because something is easily at my disposal, is in no way evidence that I used it.

Let me again use christian logic. Do you have proof Israelites didn't use those stories? If not, then it must be true just like I don't have proof jesus didn't rise from the dead, so it happened. Right?

Can you address the krishna comparison? I think it is rather odd how similar they are... almost like the newer fairy tale (christianity) plagiarizes/borrows themes, not very original. Maybe to you that doesn't raise an eyebrow, but to me it seems too similar to be a coincidence.

 

[Retro Rob]

Let me again use christian logic. Do you have proof Israelites didn't use those stories? If not, then it must be true just like I don't have proof jesus didn't rise from the dead, so it happened. Right?

You claim they copied, and now you shift the burder for me to prove they didn't?

You made the original (positive) claim, why should I prove anything? You haven't met your burder...in fact, you said "I cannot prove" they did.

So this topic is over.

Can you address the krishna comparison?

No, as I don't have to. You brought it up. I did you a favor in pointing out at least one flaw in your previous Horus link.

Like you say, those with an "open mind" will see and judge for themselves.

 

[SlowSpyder]

You claim they copied, and now you shift the burder for me to prove they didn't?

You made the original claim, why should I prove anything? You haven't met your burder...in fact, you said "I cannot prove" then did. So this topic is over.



No, as I don't have to. You brought it up. I did you a favor in pointing out at least one flaw in your previous Horus link.

Like you say, those with an "open mind" will see and judge for themselves.

I am using the exact same logic you use to defend the divinity of jesus for a reason... So what's the problem?



Topic not over.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Many of us have done this. However, many of us have also discovered that regardless of the Christian Dogma, there are things in the Bible that just doesn't fit the Dogma.

The Bible itself is easy to understand.

The reason it is obvious that many of you have not is because Atheist`s and you included mis-quote scripture and then are amazed that it could mean something other than what you think it means!

 

[JEDIYoda]

So basically to understand scripture I need to look at it without using critical thinking or logic, then I'll understand?

again here we go again -- same talking points -- critical thinking and logic..
whose critical thinking and whose logic?

 

[sandorski]

The reason it is obvious that many of you have not is because Atheist`s and you included mis-quote scripture and then are amazed that it could mean something other than what you think it means!

You say "Misquote", but when you "correct" us, what we get is merely Apologetics asserting an interpretation that a plain reading does not support.

 

[jhbball]

again here we go again -- same talking points -- critical thinking and logic..
whose critical thinking and whose logic?

JEDI: when did you become a Christian?

 

[Pray To Jesus]

[FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Sans-serif,sans-serif]Christ Was Unique in His Teachings
[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Sans-serif,sans-serif]In order to explain why Jesus employed so much Hebrew literature, we must understand His relationship with that literature. A statement from Peter’s first epistle is quite helpful in this regard: [/FONT]

• [FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Sans-serif,sans-serif]Concerning which salvation the prophets sought and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: searching what time or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did point unto (1 Peter 1:10-11, emp. added).[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Sans-serif,sans-serif]Peter’s point of emphasis was that Christ was not just an interested reader of ancient Hebrew scripture; rather, He was its Author. He wrote the Jewish Old Testament through His Spirit that worked through the prophets. When He quoted Isaiah or Jeremiah, He neither copied their material nor plagiarized their truths. Quite the contrary, in fact. He simply quoted the texts that He personally had inspired and published through the ancient holy men. As the famous “church father” Tertullian wrote in his Apology, “There is nothing so old as the truth” (chapter 47). To suggest that Christ’s teachings were not unique because He quoted passages from the Old Testament would be like saying that the author of a particular book could not quote from that book in later lectures or publications, lest he be charged with plagiarism of his own material.
[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Sans-serif,sans-serif]There are those, of course, who will discount the above argument by claiming that the New Testament has no authority to answer such questions. Thus, they will continue to claim that Jesus “borrowed” His ideas from the pages of Israel’s texts. If they wish to defend such a viewpoint, then let them find in the Old Testament any description of eternal punishment comparable to the one Jesus provided in Mark 9:42. Where in the Old Testament Scriptures do we find that it is more difficult for a rich person to enter heaven than for a camel to go through the eye of a needle? Where in the Old Testament is the idea of loving one’s neighbor developed to the extent that Christ described in the parable of the Good Samaritan? Jesus of Nazareth did not merely regurgitate Old Testament passages, adding jots and tittles as He went along. Instead, He came to fulfill the Old Law, and to instigate a New Law with distinctive concepts and commands—a point the writer of Hebrews made quite clear when he stated: “In that he saith, ‘a new covenant,’ he hath made the first old. But that which waxeth aged is nigh unto vanishing away” (8:13). [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Sans-serif,sans-serif]Even though it can be proven that Jesus did not plagiarize the Old Testament, the battle for the uniqueness of His teachings does not end there. Traces of concepts that predate Christ’s earthly existence also can be found in His teachings. Earlier, we quoted from Augustine, who noted that Plato’s followers claimed Christ had copied their philosophical hero (except, they opined, that Christ was not nearly as eloquent). Further, rabbi Hillel, who lived approximately fifty years before Jesus, taught: “What thou wouldest not have done to thee, do not that to others” (see Bales, n.d., p. 7). Confucius (and a host of other ancient writers) taught things that Jesus also taught. From China to Egypt, a steady stream of pagans uttered things that Christ, centuries later, likewise would say. How, then, can the teachings of Christ be considered unique if they had been surfacing in different cultures and civilizations for hundreds of years before His visit to Earth? Perhaps this would be a good place to ask: What is the alternative? As Bales noted: [/FONT]

• [FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Sans-serif,sans-serif]If Christ had been completely original, He would have had to omit every truth which had been revealed in the Old Testament, or which had been discerned by the reason of man. If He had done this, His teaching would have been inadequate, for it would have omitted many moral and spiritual truths (n[/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Sans-serif,sans-serif].d., p. 21, emp. added).[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Sans-serif,sans-serif]Jesus came not to reiterate ancient truths, but rather to synthesize those truths into a complete unit. He embodied every spiritual truth the world had ever seen or ever would see. As Bales commented: “Christ embodies all the moral good which is found in other religions, and He omits their errors” (p. 7). In his letter to the Christians in Colossae, Paul described Christ as the one “in whom are all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge hidden” (2:3, emp. added). Christ’s teachings are like gold; tiny amounts can be found in almost every area of the world—from ocean water to the human body. However, in order for that gold to be usable, it must be collected into a mass large enough to refine. Christ is the “refining pot” of all knowledge and wisdom, wherein the dross of error is purged from the precious metal of divine truth. While tiny specks of His teachings emerge from practically every religion, they can be refined only when collected as a whole in the essence of Jesus the Nazarene. Stephen Franklin put it like this: [/FONT]

• [FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Sans-serif,sans-serif]By providing echoes of Christian themes in every culture and in every religion, he [God—KB/BT] has given the entire human race some “handle” that allows them at least a preliminary understanding of the gospel when it is preached (1993, p. 51).[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Sans-serif,sans-serif]Furthermore, consider both the power and the authority evident in Christ’s teachings. Even His enemies were unable to refute what He taught. When the Jewish Sanhedrin decided to take action against Him and dispatched its security force to seize Him, those officers returned empty handed and admitted: “No man ever spoke like this Man!” (John 7:46, NKJV, emp. added). When He was only twelve years old and His parents accidentally left Him behind in Jerusalem, they returned to find Him in a discussion of religious matters with the learned scribes, “and all that heard him were amazed at his understanding and his answers” (Luke 2:47). [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Sans-serif,sans-serif]The Jews had long yearned for a Messiah (“Christ”) Who would save and deliver them. The Samaritan woman Christ met at the well spoke of this very fact, to which He replied: “I that speak unto thee am he” (John 4:26). When Jesus was on trial before the Sanhedrin, Caiaphas the high priest asked: “Are you the Christ?” His reply was firm: “It is as you said” (Matthew 26:63-64). He spoke with authority regarding the pre-human past, because He was there (John 1:1ff.). In the present, “there is no creature that is not manifest in his sight, but all things are naked and laid open before the eyes of him with whom we have to do” (Hebrews 4:13). And He knows the future, as is evident from even a cursory reading of His prophecies about the building of His church (Matthew 16:18), the sending of the Holy Spirit to the apostles (John 14:26), and His many descriptions of His ultimate return and the Day of Judgment (Matthew 25:31-46, et al.). All of this, and more, explains why Paul referred to Him as “King of King, and Lord of Lords” (1 Timothy 6:15). No one ever possessed, or spoke with, the kind of authority with which Christ was endowed, which is why He taught: “All authority hath been given unto me in heaven and on earth” (Matthew 28:18). Fraudulent saviors never claimed such, nor had their own enemies confirm such. Perhaps this is one reason why, in the feature article from Time magazine’s December 6, 1999 cover story (“Jesus at 2000”), author Reynolds Price wrote: [/FONT]

• [FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Sans-serif,sans-serif]It would require much exotic calculation, however, to deny that the single most powerful figure—not merely in these two millennia but in all human history—has been Jesus of Nazareth.... [A] serious argument can be made that no one else’s life has proved remotely as powerful and enduring as that of Jesus. It’s an astonishing conclusion in light of the fact that Jesus was a man who lived a short life in a rural backwater of the Roman Empire [and] who died in agony as a convicted criminal... (154[23]:86).[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Sans-serif,sans-serif]Mythical saviors never had such an assessment made of their lives. [/FONT]

Lots more where that come from.

 

[dphantom]

You say "Misquote", but when you "correct" us, what we get is merely Apologetics asserting an interpretation that a plain reading does not support.

what some of us are trying to do is explain Scripture to unbelievers. That of course is difficult. While many of us get different meaning out of Scripture, there is never any doubt that your out of context "plain reading" simply is wrong. Now there are many good arguments over the precise meaning of various Scripture and that is a failing of man, not God.

No Scripture, though, ever asserts the awful things you think it does. Understood in the context of the lesson being taught, it is quite clear that our God is a loving, compassionate God who will give sinners every opportunity to see the truth but is perfectly just with those who will not.

 

[sandorski]

re: parallels between Jesus and more ancient Religious figures

Some are accurate, some of them are not. The "documentary" Zietgeist, for eg, has a whole bunch of inaccuracies on the subject. Some of them do exist though and in an uncanny fashion. That doesn't prove anything, but it raises a lot of suspicions.

Add in the "Christian" holidays of Christmas and Easter, we have 2 examples of the same phenomena. Is there even 1 aspect of Christmas that has a Christian origin other than the name and some songs? Easter has some Christian aspects, some Pagan.

We can also see other working examples of this phenomena. The Roman Catholic church is one of the examples. It is one of the few organizations with direct links back to the original Orthodoxy of Christianity. AS it expanded around the world, one way it converted "Heathens"was to simply absorb local belief, creating Christian-Pagan hybrids. It was a very effective conversion method.

We even see this same thing happen in Rome at the time of initial Orthodoxy. Old Temples became Churches, idols were merely Christianized, holidays were Christianized.

A weaker example, but an interesting one to me is contemporary American Evangelicalism. It is quite diverse, but amongst that diversity are strong Cultural influences. One of those is based on Nationalism, but the more interesting one is based upon Economics. This is called the Prosperity Gospel by many and is an odd mixture of Christianity and Capitalism that, IMO, isn't very Biblical. Although if one picks their Scripture carefully some kind of justification can be offered for it.

 

[sandorski]

what some of us are trying to do is explain Scripture to unbelievers. That of course is difficult. While many of us get different meaning out of Scripture, there is never any doubt that your out of context "plain reading" simply is wrong. Now there are many good arguments over the precise meaning of various Scripture and that is a failing of man, not God.

No Scripture, though, ever asserts the awful things you think it does. Understood in the context of the lesson being taught, it is quite clear that our God is a loving, compassionate God who will give sinners every opportunity to see the truth but is perfectly just with those who will not.

Did "god" command the slaughter of people and did the ancient Jewish people carry out that slaughter or did they not?

 

[Pray To Jesus]

Did "god" command the slaughter of people and did the ancient Jewish people carry out that slaughter or did they not?

[FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Sans-serif,sans-serif][SIZE=+1]Joshua's Conquests .. Holy War or Genocide?[/SIZE][/FONT]

 

[dphantom]

Add in the "Christian" holidays of Christmas and Easter, we have 2 examples of the same phenomena. Is there even 1 aspect of Christmas that has a Christian origin other than the name and some songs? Easter has some Christian aspects, some Pagan.

Neither of which are extensions of Christianity sa has been explained much earlier. No one knows the date of Christ's birth. A festival was used to coopt pagans and help convert them to Christianity. Same with Easter to a certain extent. The "egg" thing is no Christian rite. Just like the "Christmas tree" is no Christian rite. Neither are a part of Christianity and in fact some sects do not include such things.

But you really know this. And any study of Christian tradition will show how these traditions came to be but are not really Christian. Of course, Jesus' death is better documented so we know it was sometime in the spring. So early Church leaders chose to subvert a pagan tradition to give Christians a day to rejoice.

Basically, they could have picked any day, it does not matter since we do not know for certainty His birth or death. But it was a very smart move to provide pagans an easier path to God and salvation.

 

[dphantom]

Did "god" command the slaughter of people and did the ancient Jewish people carry out that slaughter or did they not?

think that must have been a war was it not? To the best of my knowledge, most war results in people dying.

 

[sandorski]

think that must have been a war was it not? To the best of my knowledge, most war results in people dieing.

Is that a "Yes"?

 

[sandorski]

[FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Sans-serif,sans-serif][SIZE=+1]Joshua's Conquests .. Holy War or Genocide?[/SIZE][/FONT]

Is that a "Yes"?