the origins of jesus, the end times, christianity and every other religion...

2

Comments

  • Smellyman2
    Smellyman2 Posts: 689
    mxaaron wrote:
    What do you mean by evidence being plausible or implausible?

    Meaning they actually had well thought out theories backed up by evidence and religion, like Christianity, has no evidence, only faith. You can believe it if you want, makes no difference to me, but I thought it was a very compelling video.
  • mxaaron
    mxaaron Posts: 92
    Smellyman wrote:
    Meaning they actually had well thought out theories backed up by evidence and religion, like Christianity, has no evidence, only faith. You can believe it if you want, makes no difference to me, but I thought it was a very compelling video.

    Do you mean to say Christianty has no evidence, implausible evidence, or that you are unconvinced by the evidence for it? Furthermore, by "evidence for Christianity" do you mean specifically the Resurrection, or the credibility of the Gospels, or the evidence for or against the existence of God (and so on)?

    Just trying to understand what exactly you mean

    Thanks
    Aaron
  • El_Kabong
    El_Kabong Posts: 4,141
    mxaaron wrote:
    Do you mean to say Christianty has no evidence, implausible evidence, or that you are unconvinced by the evidence for it? Furthermore, by "evidence for Christianity" do you mean specifically the Resurrection, or the credibility of the Gospels, or the evidence for or against the existence of God (and so on)?

    Just trying to understand what exactly you mean

    Thanks
    Aaron

    yes, where is the proof, especially to date wise, of the flood and noah's ark? the resurrection? jesus at all, other than from the bible? that god spoke to moses on the mountain? the burning bush? it's blind faith.

    what do you think will happen during the rapture/end times?

    did you watch the video and see all the documented similarities of figures like jesus from religions BEFORE, in some cases hundreds of years before, christianity? 3 kings, death, resurrection after 3 days, the cross, 12 brothers/disciples, virgin birth, mary, moses like figures (placed in a basket in the water, raised by royalty, took the word of god...)w/ names like 'mises'....?
    standin above the crowd
    he had a voice that was strong and loud and
    i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
    eager to identify with
    someone above the crowd
    someone who seemed to feel the same
    someone prepared to lead the way
  • ForestBrain
    ForestBrain Posts: 460
    I wish people could just stop being judgmental.
    I believe people love arguing and they will do it over anything they can.
    When life gives you lemons, throw them at somebody.
  • mxaaron
    mxaaron Posts: 92
    El_Kabong wrote:
    yes, where is the proof, especially to date wise, of the flood and noah's ark? the resurrection? jesus at all, other than from the bible? that god spoke to moses on the mountain? the burning bush? it's blind faith.

    what do you think will happen during the rapture/end times?

    did you watch the video and see all the documented similarities of figures like jesus from religions BEFORE, in some cases hundreds of years before, christianity? 3 kings, death, resurrection after 3 days, the cross, 12 brothers/disciples, virgin birth, mary, moses like figures (placed in a basket in the water, raised by royalty, took the word of god...)w/ names like 'mises'....?

    Mr. Kabong,

    What proof do you need? The Jesus-myth theory is held by few (if any)reputable scholars, inculding secular. His existence is almost non-debatable; what can be questioned are the claims He made, that is, about himself being the Son of God. I could say the testimonies presented in the Gospels, and throughout the writings of Paul (and others) are indeed "evidence of Christianity" (which, as I mentioned in an earlier post, is ambiguous).

    And yes, I did watch the video, but there wasn't any groundbreaking information that can't be found by doing a simple Google search. Did you read any of the books I suggested? Some scholary books, and heck, some authors have degrees in the relevent fields, and even have citations and the like. Perhaps you check them out...
  • Specifics
    Specifics Posts: 417
    ForestBrain wrote:
    I wish people could just stop being judgmental.
    I believe people love arguing and they will do it over anything they can.

    That is complete bullshit, no-one likes arguing. You dick.
  • Collin
    Collin Posts: 4,931
    ForestBrain wrote:
    I wish people could just stop being judgmental.

    Funny.
    THANK YOU, LOSTDAWG!


    naděje umírá poslední
  • El_Kabong
    El_Kabong Posts: 4,141
    mxaaron wrote:
    Mr. Kabong,

    What proof do you need? The Jesus-myth theory is held by few (if any)reputable scholars, inculding secular. His existence is almost non-debatable; what can be questioned are the claims He made, that is, about himself being the Son of God. I could say the testimonies presented in the Gospels, and throughout the writings of Paul (and others) are indeed "evidence of Christianity" (which, as I mentioned in an earlier post, is ambiguous).

    And yes, I did watch the video, but there wasn't any groundbreaking information that can't be found by doing a simple Google search. Did you read any of the books I suggested? Some scholary books, and heck, some authors have degrees in the relevent fields, and even have citations and the like. Perhaps you check them out...


    Mr. Aaron,

    that didn't answer any of my questions other than did you watch it.

    Sincerely,
    Kabong

    PS no, i haven't had a chance to read any books yet, but what about the pretty big list of scholars from that time who never mentioned jesus? and what about all the reoccuring themes in these religions?
    standin above the crowd
    he had a voice that was strong and loud and
    i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
    eager to identify with
    someone above the crowd
    someone who seemed to feel the same
    someone prepared to lead the way
  • chopitdown
    chopitdown Posts: 2,222
    El_Kabong wrote:

    PS no, i haven't had a chance to read any books yet, but what about the pretty big list of scholars from that time who never mentioned jesus?

    So if all scholars didn't comment on Jesus it implies that he is made up? I'm sure a lot of those scholars left out many details in regards to other things. The fact they didn't report on Jesus can mean a lot of things; your presuppositions about Jesus prob lead you to a conclusion that you like, just as my presupps lead me to a conclusion I like.
    El_Kabong wrote:
    and what about all the reoccuring themes in these religions?
    http://www.probe.org/content/view/781/77/
    The first argument against this view is the logical fallacy of false cause. This fallacy occurs when someone argues that just because two things exist side by side, that one must be the cause of the other. As one theologian has written, the History of Religions School had the tendency "to convert parallels into influences and influences into sources."{5} Causal connection is much harder to prove than proximity. The mere fact that other religions may have had a god who died and then came back to life in some manner does not mean that this was the source of Christian ideas, even if it can be shown that the apostles knew of this other set of beliefs.

    Some scholars, hostile to Christianity, tend to exaggerate, or invent, similarities between Christianity and the mystery religions. British scholar Edwyn Bevan writes:

    Of course if one writes an imaginary description of the Orphic mysteries . . . filling in the large gaps in the picture left by our data from the Christian Eucharist, one produces something very impressive. On this plan, you first put in the Christian elements, and then are staggered to find them there.{6}

    An example might be the practice of the taurobolium in the cult of Cybele or Great Mother. This initiation rite, in which the blood of a sacrificed bull is allowed to pour over a neophyte, is claimed by some to be the source of baptism in Christianity. Arguments have been made that the language "blood of the lamb" (Rev. 7:14), and "blood of Jesus" (1 Peter 1:2) was borrowed from the language of the taurobolium and criobolium in which a ram was slaughtered. In fact, a better argument can be made that the cult borrowed its language from the Christian tradition.

    The cult of Cybele did not use the taurobolium until the second century A.D.
    make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
  • RolandTD20Kdrummer
    RolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    The first link that comes up when you search for "Jesus" on youtube:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KiAvmzcZbg
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • THC
    THC Posts: 525
    El_Kabong wrote:
    Mr. Aaron,

    that didn't answer any of my questions other than did you watch it.

    Sincerely,
    Kabong

    PS no, i haven't had a chance to read any books yet, but what about the pretty big list of scholars from that time who never mentioned jesus? and what about all the reoccuring themes in these religions?

    i didn't see this video as i'm at work...but what big list of scholars from that era never mentioned Jesus? I don't think that really proves much either though because he was a local phenomenon. Who would really be writing and talking up what a colony of the Roman Empire was doing? Also, he only had a 3 year public life...and taught by word of mouth.
    “Kept in a small bowl, the goldfish will remain small. With more space, the fish can grow double, triple, or quadruple its size.”
    -Big Fish
  • Cosmo
    Cosmo Posts: 12,225
    mxaaron wrote:
    I see little relevance to the post I made, which was simply to inform the readers of the topic of some good, scholary, works which discuss Jesus, his origins, resurrection, and so on. To be honest, I was not expecting a response to my post; there was nothing to respond to, for I like I said, I simply suggested a few books for those who were interested. But,alas, I recieve a response like this...

    But to answer your question, there were many magicians in antiquity, some of which were mentioned in the Bible. Is your argument that Jesus was nothing more than a magician, who impressed onlookers? If so, you must provide some evidence for you claim, which unfortunatley you haven't provided. One might assume the "miracles" described in the Gospels were nothing more than illusions shown to gullible onlookers, but this requires that 1. There must have been a man Jesus who did these things
    Many (such as Jesusneverexisted.com) are not willing to accept that.
    and
    2. The Gospels must be at the very least somewhat trustworthy (or else you could not use them for your theory)
    The reason Christ has a religion based upon him is not because of his miracles, whether you believe them to be supernatural or not, but rather the fact he claimed to be the Messiah, a Savior. His miracles were secondary to the crucifixion and resurrection.

    Aaron
    ...
    Okay... looks like someone got cheated on their dose of humor.
    It was just a dumb question... nothing more. Just a dumb question based upon the fact that the Life of Jesus was written by men... possibly, men with biased viewpoints. Who's to say the authors didn't take a little 'Artistic license' and added embellishments when writing about His life? And how do we know that the text we read today was not edited by the Church back in 623 A.D? All we have is what is written in the Bible... the Bible that was in exclusively in the hands of the Church for how many hundreds of years? Is the Church is something we can trust?
    ...
    So... yeah... when Jesus turned water into wine... miracle or magic?
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • Cosmo
    Cosmo Posts: 12,225
    If God had a sense of humor... you know what would really be funny?
    Scientology is the One religion of truth.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • mxaaron
    mxaaron Posts: 92
    Cosmo wrote:
    ...
    Okay... looks like someone got cheated on their dose of humor.
    It was just a dumb question... nothing more. Just a dumb question based upon the fact that the Life of Jesus was written by men... possibly, men with biased viewpoints. Who's to say the authors didn't take a little 'Artistic license' and added embellishments when writing about His life? And how do we know that the text we read today was not edited by the Church back in 623 A.D? All we have is what is written in the Bible... the Bible that was in exclusively in the hands of the Church for how many hundreds of years? Is the Church is something we can trust?
    ...
    So... yeah... when Jesus turned water into wine... miracle or magic?

    Didn't mean to come off too harsh earlier; sorry....

    Yes, the Bible was written by men. As for the writers being bias, yeah, probably, considering the fact all the books were written by Jesus' followers (how, then, could they not be?) As for the Church editing texts, admittedly it has been done. But that is not really a problem, for there are many manuscripts to compare (older than the 7th century, by the way) which scholars can get a pretty good idea of what was original and what was added or embellished (for example, the last few verses of the book of Mark, or the Trinitarian passage in 1John).

    As for turning the water into wine...well, I'm sure the people at the party were happy either way....

    Aaron
  • catefrances
    catefrances Posts: 29,003
    Cosmo wrote:
    ...
    So... yeah... when Jesus turned water into wine... miracle or magic?

    bullshit probably. but that wont stop me inviting the man to my next party. :D
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • El_Kabong
    El_Kabong Posts: 4,141
    chopitdown wrote:
    So if all scholars didn't comment on Jesus it implies that he is made up? I'm sure a lot of those scholars left out many details in regards to other things. The fact they didn't report on Jesus can mean a lot of things; your presuppositions about Jesus prob lead you to a conclusion that you like, just as my presupps lead me to a conclusion I like.


    http://www.probe.org/content/view/781/77/
    The first argument against this view is the logical fallacy of false cause. This fallacy occurs when someone argues that just because two things exist side by side, that one must be the cause of the other. As one theologian has written, the History of Religions School had the tendency "to convert parallels into influences and influences into sources."{5} Causal connection is much harder to prove than proximity. The mere fact that other religions may have had a god who died and then came back to life in some manner does not mean that this was the source of Christian ideas, even if it can be shown that the apostles knew of this other set of beliefs.

    Some scholars, hostile to Christianity, tend to exaggerate, or invent, similarities between Christianity and the mystery religions. British scholar Edwyn Bevan writes:

    Of course if one writes an imaginary description of the Orphic mysteries . . . filling in the large gaps in the picture left by our data from the Christian Eucharist, one produces something very impressive. On this plan, you first put in the Christian elements, and then are staggered to find them there.{6}

    An example might be the practice of the taurobolium in the cult of Cybele or Great Mother. This initiation rite, in which the blood of a sacrificed bull is allowed to pour over a neophyte, is claimed by some to be the source of baptism in Christianity. Arguments have been made that the language "blood of the lamb" (Rev. 7:14), and "blood of Jesus" (1 Peter 1:2) was borrowed from the language of the taurobolium and criobolium in which a ram was slaughtered. In fact, a better argument can be made that the cult borrowed its language from the Christian tradition.

    The cult of Cybele did not use the taurobolium until the second century A.D.


    did you watch the video? it lays out faaaaar more similarities than 'died and came back'

    like birth followed by 3 kings, virgin birth, mary, 12 apostles/brothers, the flood and ark, ppl like moses only named mises who were also placed in a basket at birth and put in a river b/c of infantcide to be raised by royalty and later take down the word of god, not only died and came back but were dead for 3 days and came back, then raise upwards and the cross....if you watched the video you would see a very big list of similarities side by side

    these things were in other religions long before the time of jesus, so i don't see how, as to your earlier claim, they are copying off christianity....if they existed first, how can they copy something thousands to hundreds of years later??
    standin above the crowd
    he had a voice that was strong and loud and
    i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
    eager to identify with
    someone above the crowd
    someone who seemed to feel the same
    someone prepared to lead the way
  • chopitdown
    chopitdown Posts: 2,222
    El_Kabong wrote:
    did you watch the video? it lays out faaaaar more similarities than 'died and came back'

    like birth followed by 3 kings, virgin birth, mary, 12 apostles/brothers, the flood and ark, ppl like moses only named mises who were also placed in a basket at birth and put in a river b/c of infantcide to be raised by royalty and later take down the word of god, not only died and came back but were dead for 3 days and came back, then raise upwards and the cross....if you watched the video you would see a very big list of similarities side by side

    these things were in other religions long before the time of jesus, so i don't see how, as to your earlier claim, they are copying off christianity....if they existed first, how can they copy something thousands to hundreds of years later??

    El... I did watch the video and their is interesting things in the video but again similarity does not imply causality...did you read the quote I posted? here it is again
    This fallacy occurs when someone argues that just because two things exist side by side, that one must be the cause of the other. As one theologian has written, the History of Religions School had the tendency "to convert parallels into influences and influences into sources."{5} Causal connection is much harder to prove than proximity.
    I'm not sure if they are copying off of christianity or, are they naturally occurring themes that are revealed in nature. Again, all of this is retrospective and with retrospective theories come bias.
    make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
  • OutOfBreath
    OutOfBreath Posts: 1,804
    Cosmo wrote:
    If God had a sense of humor... you know what would really be funny?
    Scientology is the One religion of truth.
    "The mormons, alright, the mormons got it right, OK? Now listen up..."

    :D

    Peace
    Dan
    "YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death

    "Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
  • rigneyclan
    rigneyclan Posts: 289
    chopitdown wrote:
    it is far more probable that if any borrowing was done, it was done by the pagan religions that wanted to emulate the success of Christianity.

    I call total bullshit.
    7/16/06 7/18/06
  • chopitdown
    chopitdown Posts: 2,222
    rigneyclan wrote:
    I call total bullshit.

    that's fine, you can do what you want.
    make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need

Categories