Comparative Religion: Godmen

lucylespian

decides2dream wrote:

truthbeknown.....is this a division of wikipedia?
in all seriousness...people can say whatever they want to say, religion is based on FAITH. whether similarities exist or not, makes not a bit of difference for those who are faithful. if one is looking for historical significance/accuracy...tis another story entirely, but still doesn't make a difference for those who belive b/c they simply believe, thus why it's called FAITH. however, i am interested to know what 'scholars' contribute to this particular site, what's their background, etc...if they are to be considered reliable sources. of course, this is from a skeptic from the get go, i don't have any faith or lack there of to prove/disprove. i am more of the live and let liver...or believe or disbelieve...philosophy....not on any quest to have anyone follow my own personal philosophies.

Usually scholars of religion are quoting other scholars, who are quoting and interpreting other scholars who are reflecting on shit people made up.

Ahnimus

lucylespian wrote:

Usually scholars of religion are quoting other scholars, who are quoting and interpreting other scholars who are reflecting on shit people made up.

Acharya quotes Wheless and Waite a lot in her book. I guess there wouldn't be much else you can do. She also admits that she's only drawing from sources which are readily available to her. Although she claims that much of the literature is not found in typical libraries either. Such as:

John Bale (1495-1563), The Pageant of the Popes: "For on a time when a cardinall Bembus did move a question out of the Gospell, the Pope gave him a very contemptuous answer saying: All ages can testify enough how profitable that fable of Christ hath been to us and our company."

lucylespian

Ahnimus wrote:

Acharya quotes Wheless and Waite a lot in her book. I guess there wouldn't be much else you can do. She also admits that she's only drawing from sources which are readily available to her. Although she claims that much of the literature is not found in typical libraries either. Such as:

John Bale (1495-1563), The Pageant of the Popes: "For on a time when a cardinall Bembus did move a question out of the Gospell, the Pope gave him a very contemptuous answer saying: All ages can testify enough how profitable that fable of Christ hath been to us and our company."

I wasn't really referring to her, I was more referring to theologians.

I am always fascinated by teh accounts of names and habits of demons whihc can be found in religious writings. I mean seriously, where did that info come from in teh first place ??? Who went ot Hell and sorted out teh nomenclature ?? Is there a demon version of Mus musculus ?? Or was there just a bit too much mushroom in the monastery stew ??

Ahnimus

lucylespian wrote:

I wasn't really referring to her, I was more referring to theologians.

I am always fascinated by teh accounts of names and habits of demons whihc can be found in religious writings. I mean seriously, where did that info come from in teh first place ??? Who went ot Hell and sorted out teh nomenclature ?? Is there a demon version of Mus musculus ?? Or was there just a bit too much mushroom in the monastery stew ??

Confabulation is a process whereby the brain fills-in blanks, turning imagination into perceived reality. It seems to me at this point that all of religion is confabulation.

Scubascott

Horus/Osiris of Egypt
• Born of the Virgin Isis-Meri on Dec. 25 in a cave/manger with his birth being anounced by a star in the east and attended by 3 wise men.
• His earthly father was named "Seb" ("Joseph")
• He was of Royal descent
• At age 12, he was a child teacher in the temple, and at 30, he was baptized, having disappeared for 18 years
• Horus was baptized in the river Eridanus or Iarutana by "Anup the Baptizer", who was decapitated
• He had 12 disciples, two of which were his "witnesses" and were named "Anup" and "Aan
• He performed miracles, exercised demons and raised El-Azarus from the dead
• Horus walked on water
• His personal epithet was "Iusa", the "ever-becoming son" of "Ptah" the "Father". He was thus called the "Holy Child"
• He delivered a "Sermon on the Mount" and his followers recounted the "Sayins of Iusa"
• Horus was transfigured on the mount
• He was crucified between two theives, burried for three days in a tomb and resurrected
• He was also the "Way, the Truth, the Light", "Messiah", "God's Anointed Son", "Son of Man", the "Good Shephard", the "Lamb of God", the "Word made flesh", the "Word of Truth", etc.
• He was "the Fisher" and was associated with the Fish ("Ichthys"), Lamb and Lion
• He came to fulfill the Law
• Horus was called "the KRST" or "Anointed One"
• Like Jesus "Horus was supposed to reign one thousand years"

What's your source on this one? I studied ancient egyptian history a little bit in final years of high school, and my understanding of the mythology is pretty different to this. I'll have to read up a bit to make sure though, it was a while ago.

The first thing that I noticed is that you seem to be equating Horus with Osiris. From memory Horus was the son of Osiris and Isis, not the equivalent of Osiris. I do recall that he was something of a holy child that walked the earth kind of deal. . . . don't remember anything about a crucifiction. He's usually represented with the head of a falcon, often with a sun disk above him, so he's related to the sun, a bit of a predecessor to Amun, who was later combined with the sun god Ra.

lucylespian

Ahnimus wrote:

Confabulation is a process whereby the brain fills-in blanks, turning imagination into perceived reality. It seems to me at this point that all of religion is confabulation.

Actually, close, but no banana.
Confabulation is actually where you pull an actual memory and use it to fill in a blank. People with dementia do this to cover the lack of new memories.

Ahnimus

lucylespian wrote:

Actually, close, but no banana.
Confabulation is actually where you pull an actual memory and use it to fill in a blank. People with dementia do this to cover the lack of new memories.

Umm, perhaps we've read different literature. I understand your meaning. But firstly, I define imagination as drawing from memory. I could have no imagination involving bananas had I no knowledge/memory of bananas.

So, in the case of Anton-Babinski Syndrome, a person is completely blind in their visual striate cortex, but they claim to see anyway. Their brain confabulates what they see. They do not actually see. Although some visual input does bypass the LGN and V1 and some patients have better-than-chance abilities to read Xs or Os from cards. They do still trip over furniture and claim to see things that do not exist in reality. I call this confabulation from imagination/memory as is how the term is used by Francis Crick amongst others.

Ahnimus

Scubascott wrote:

What's your source on this one? I studied ancient egyptian history a little bit in final years of high school, and my understanding of the mythology is pretty different to this. I'll have to read up a bit to make sure though, it was a while ago.

The first thing that I noticed is that you seem to be equating Horus with Osiris. From memory Horus was the son of Osiris and Isis, not the equivalent of Osiris. I do recall that he was something of a holy child that walked the earth kind of deal. . . . don't remember anything about a crucifiction. He's usually represented with the head of a falcon, often with a sun disk above him, so he's related to the sun, a bit of a predecessor to Amun, who was later combined with the sun god Ra.

The source is Acharya, though I'm not sure if she is claiming that they are the same, or perhaps identify the relation or suggesting they share the same characteristics. Wikipedia says that Osiris was the father of Horus. However, these characters are mythological and I've no doubt that they did share many of the same characteristics, especially over time as the characters developed. It's quite difficult to find congruent mythology on-line.

Ahnimus

Merry Mithras! On the BBC
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-2266166128626497168

Jeanie

catefrances wrote:

he's also hindu. not buddhist.

eh!! Teams again!! Everybody's always wanting to pick a team!

I like ganesh! He's pretty!

Kann

The dangers of using an un-neutral source is the risk of spinning facts. The site is at least wrong for Horus/Osiris and some points of the Buddha part. I can't tell for the others, but I'm betting on convenient changes.
I agree with the point though, most religions/beliefs have a common ground, and it's really strange for such distant religions (in space I mean) such as buddhism and christianism.

Collin

Ahnimus wrote:

Oops it was Oklahoma

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2vf_nijscc

I would not want to live there.

deadnothingbetter

Ahnimus wrote:

Hey, I'm a skeptic too, and I checked this out before I bought her book. My only complaint with her style is that she is very aggressive. As stated before I edited the text transcribed from her book to make it less aggressive towards Christianity, the book it's self is called The Christ Conspiracy: The Greatest Story Ever Sold, but that shouldn't negate any truth to it.



Some of the languages she speaks include Greek and she has studied the Greek scriptures, she has also been involved in various digs around the world. You can watch an interview with her at http://www.truthbeknown.com in the upper-right corner of the main page, where she addresses some of the criticisms about her book.

i don't understand this website. it has articles depunking christianity, then it has articles debunking atheism.

Collin

deadnothingbetter wrote:

i don't understand this website. it has articles depunking christianity, then it has articles debunking atheism.

How can anyone debunk or even try to debunk atheism?

deadnothingbetter

Collin wrote:

How can anyone debunk or even try to debunk atheism?

http://www.thegodargument.com/ this link is found on this website that ahnimus provided.

Collin

thegodargument wrote:

The God Argument is based on the philosophy that if you can disprove all possible answers to a question except one, then that one answer is true! An example of this would be if you are taking a multiple choice test with four choices, and you know that B, C, and D are wrong, then you know A is correct! You prove 'A' is correct by disproving the other three choices. You do not need to directly prove that A is correct, it is correct by default.

I must say the god argument is one of the weakest arguments I've ever heard...

deadnothingbetter

Collin wrote:

I must say the god argument is one of the weakest arguments I've ever heard...

well, yeah, maybe. these arguments are not knew though. but still how would you respond if someone asks you what was before the big bang? do you even call it the "big bang"? what's the right term for it, the thing that started it all, what was before that?

RolandTD20Kdrummer

Religion? they're all cults....pure blathering mindfuckedness... lol

p.s. love thy neighbor...thou shalt not kill...or pee on my lawn...or show up with at my door with a bible...

the rest?.... ehhh whatever...

Collin

deadnothingbetter wrote:

well, yeah, maybe. these arguments are not knew though. but still how would you respond if someone asks you what was before the big bang? do you even call it the "big bang"? what's the right term for it, the thing that started it all, what was before that?

I'd say I don't know. But how exactly is that an argument pro god?

They say if it's not B, C or D it must be A. Great, but whatever happened to E, F, G, H ...

RolandTD20Kdrummer

Ahnimus wrote:

I just watched the move last night, sad, sad movie. I almost cried and I'm a cold-hearted bastard.

http://www.deliverusfromevilthemovie.com/index_flash.php

The church is essentially a state within a state....and what is taught, and upheld, is that you don't question the authority of those in power.... i.e. you don't out priests for sexual abuse, that's the mindset...

so beautiful a construct as you can see...