The Bible Thread: Help Fight Redundancy

Excuse me, but the cynicism and sarcasm are not appreciated. The fact is that I was specifically addressing a point about Christianity, and obviously used the Bible as my reference. If you can't address this without attacking someone's faith, I suggest you not address it at all.

 

Excuse me, but the cynicism and sarcasm are not appreciated.

But it's all i know. Take away my sarcasm, and i'm nothing. (wink symbol means don't take things so seriously)

I'm not attacking anyone.

"Other than that, we know that some of the Christians in the first century were given the gift of prophecy - in fact, Paul made it clear in I Corinthians that prophecy was to be the most desired spiritual gift."

Care to substantiate that without the use of "Because the bible told me so"?

 

hello, i'm mostly new to the JC, and stumbled upon this thread (mostly) by accident... but, i'm glad i found it!

i am a Religious Studies/Philosophy Major, and am Non-Christian... However, i have nothing but the utmost respect for
all religions, and hope that my contributions to this thread will not be frowned upon because i am not Christian...

i study religious texts from a variety of religions, but do not consider myself an expert in any one field... in fact, i consider my self a perpetual student of Spirituality... i have my own faith, but am afraid to share it on the boards for fear of receiving "hate" mail designed to "save my soul" - i consider my soul "saved"* by the mere fact that i know Love and because i try to be a good human being, mother, wife, friend, daughter, etc...

*i may go into what i mean by "saved" some other time

anyway, this wasn't meant to be an introduction...

Fat_Fett wrote:

One time I posted - "What other religion has a Creator who loves his creation so much that he sends his own son to die for them so they might be redeemed?" . My response was something like "If you looked at ancient myths, you'd see that Jesus' story wasn't that uncommon."

i am sorry, Fat_Fett, to learn that your questions were answered in, IMO, such a lazy and vague fashion...
i will try to respect your quest for knowledge by giving you some of the answers that i have found on the internet - i have books on my own shelves that address these myths, but, i don't know the JC policies about reprinting excerpts from books, etc - i'll try to figure that out later, but in the mean time, i have provided a link to a website that will, hopefully, give you a better understanding of some of the Pagan/Pre-Christian Savior Myths, particularly in the theme of death and resurrection/salvation requirement(s)... you can also do searches, (i suggest google.com,) on any of the names of the Gods/Goddess that appear in the text to learn more about them... and please, all note, i am not trying to bash the Christian religion, insult its followers, or to debunk it... peace!


Pagan Origins of Savior Myths

[excerpt from website:]

The Mystery religions -- dying, resurrecting Godmen who bring salvation
Although you don't hear about them in Sunday School, mystery religions are an established part of mainstream religious scholarship. The Gods of the Mystery religions had differing names and myths, but the faiths themselves had features in common: their Gods died and came back to life; they were personal religions entered into voluntarily via initiation ceremonies that reenacted the God's death and rebirth and were often described by ancient writers as giving rebirth and salvation and their Gods have miraculous power to heal illness; initiates took food and drink in ceremonies that reenacted a holy meal established by the God; they had secret teachings brought the faithful closer to an understanding of God.
The mystery religions date from at least 1,500 BC.

The Gods of the mysteries include: Isis & Osiris, Dionysus, Sabezius, Mithras, Attis and others. A full list would be way long -- world class scholar Walter Burkett estimates there were 600 "mystery cults," -- he avoids "mystery religion," since that makes them sound separate and isolated from mainstream ancient religion. In fact they were the standard expression of personal religion in ancient times.

Salvation The purpose of mystery initiation? Salvation. We know this because that's what the ancients say. Here are some examples.

Osiris' followers found salvation in his rebirth. The exact ritual steps of the initiation into the Mysteries of Osiris, we don't know -- they were kept secret on pain of death. That the initiation meant salvation could be written -- and was:

"The keys of hell and the guarantee of salvation were in the hands of the goddess, and the initiation ceremony itself a kind of voluntar

 

i found another link that i think is exceptionally well informed and valuable...

Parallels between the Christian Gospels and Pagan Mythology

topics include:

• Christian reaction to possible Pagan origins of the Gospels


• Pagan saviors of humanity


• Life events shared by Osiris-Dionysus and Jesus


• Life events shared by Jesus and one other godman


• Similarities between Pagan and Christian practices


• Reasons for the Pagan-Christian similarities


• Implications of the Pagan-Christian similarities

 

Great links, Kerr_Plunk.

As far as i know, it's pretty liberal here. Post whatever you want from other websites, say whatever you want. Just don't swear. I don't think we have any other rules. You don't seem like the flaming type so i wouldn't worry about that.

 

It's possible a lot of "present" Christianity was somewhat warped by Paul, one of the founders of the Church. If you look at the bible closely Paul's teachings are somewhat different from Jesus's. Jesus, for instance, actually hung around with sinners(Tax collectors, prostitutes, etc.) and was not very judgemental, except maybe of the Pharisees. Yet Paul seems to condemn such actions. It's important to realize that the gospels were all written *after* Paul's letters, as well.
Note how Jesus and Paul contradict each other:




Jesus (Matthew 5:18-20) For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass
away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is
accomplished. {19} Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these
commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of
heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the
kingdom of heaven. {20} For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds
that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of
heaven.

Paul (Romans 7:6) But now we are discharged from the law, dead to that
which held us captive, so that we serve not under the old written code but
in the new life of the Spirit.




Jesus (John 14:15) "If you love me, you will keep my commandments."

Paul (Ephesians 2:14-16) For he is our peace, who has made us both one, and
has broken down the dividing wall of hostility, {15} by abolishing in his
flesh the law of commandments and ordinances, that he might create in
himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, {16} and might
reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby bringing the
hostility to an end.





John (1 John 2:4-6) He who says "I know him" but disobeys his commandments
is a liar, and the truth is not in him; {5} but whoever keeps his word, in
him truly love for God is perfected. By this we may be sure that we are in
him: {6} he who says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which
he walked.

Paul (Romans 7:18-19) For I know that nothing good dwells within me, that
is, in my flesh. I can will what is right, but I cannot do it. {19} For I do
not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I do.




James (James 4:11-12) Do not speak evil against one another, brethren. He
that speaks evil against a brother or judges his brother, speaks evil
against the law and judges the law. But if you judge the law, you are not a
doer of the law but a judge. {12} There is one lawgiver and judge, he who is
able to save and to destroy. But who are you that you judge your neighbor?

Paul (1 Corinthians 6:3) Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How
much more, matters pertaining to this life!


Jesus:Call no man your father on Earth.

Paul: I am one of your fathers through Christ.

 

Here's some links:

http://www.wordwiz72.com/paul.html


http://www.liberalslikechrist.org/mainpage/forsalvation.html


So, in other words, it's maybe a good idea to respect the writings of the Apostles, and be somewhat wary of Paul....hopefully I'm not spouting blasphemy here...

 

The myths listed are fables. Osiris can not be historically confirmed as actually having lived.

Jesus is historically confirmed as having lived, so his story is the truth.


EDIT:
Also, another argument is:

God and Satan do not live in the realm of time. They are both eternal beings who can see what is going to happen (Satan/Lucifer was once the most powerful being besides God in Heaven), but only God is omnipowerful.

Satan, the "Father of Lies", knows about Jesus' coming beforehand, so he crafts pagan religions for others to follow that will make Christianity look as if it is mearly a copy of these.

However, these made-up religions can not be backed up historically.

Jesus' existence is recorded in history.

 

Jesus is historically confirmed as having lived, so his story is the truth

Some historians and people disagree.

 

In Rome, in the year 93, the highly rated Roman historian Flavius Josephus published his extensive history of the Jews. In discussing the period in which the Jews of Judaea were governed by the Roman procurator Pontius Pilate, Josephus included this revealing account that shows that not only did Jesus of Nazareth live, but that He rose from the :

" About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was one who performed surprising deeds and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Messiah. And when, upon the accusation of the principal men among us, Pilate had condemned him to a cross, those who had first come to love him did not cease. He appeared to them spending a third day restored to life, for the prophets of God had foretold these things and a thousand other marvels about him. And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared. " - Jewish Antiquities, 18.3.3 §63 (Based on the translation of Louis H. Feldman, The Loeb Classical Library.)



What People in History Say

We know that Jesus lived. He was a man in history, as well as a man for all times. Tacitus, perhaps the greatest Roman historian born in the first century, speaks of Jesus. Josephus, a Jewish historian born A.D. 37, tells of the crucifixion of Jesus. A contemporary Bible scholar said "the latest edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica uses 20,000 words in describing this person, Jesus. His description took more space than was given to Aristotle, Cicero, Alexander, Julius Caesar, Buddha, Confucius, Mohammed or Napoleon Bonaparte." See: John 21:24-25

Josephus Says

"Now there was about this time Jesus a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him many Jews, and also many of the Greeks. This man was the Christ. And when Pilate had condemned him to the cross, those who had loved him from the first did not forsake him for he appeared to them alive on the third day, the divine prophets having spoken these and thousands of other wonderful things about him. And even now, the race of Christians, so named from him, has not died out." From the Writings of Josephus, before 100 A.D. See: Rom 4:23-25; 1 Cor 15:13-20


EVIDENCE FOR THE HISTORICAL JESUS
Commenting on the uniqueness of the New Testament's claim for Jesus, Micahel Green has observed,


It is all about the Jesus of history. Remove him from Christianity and nothing distinctive is left. Once disprove the historicity of Jesus Christ, and Christianity will collapse like a pack of cards. For it all depends on this fundamental conviction, that God was made
manifest in human flesh. And that is a matter not of ideology or mythology but history. 1

Just how well founded the claim for the historical Jesus is will be seen in the evidence as follows.

1. Micahel Green Runaway World, Inter-Varsity Press, p. 12.

From Pagan Sources
Palestine of the first century has been referred to as an unimportant frontier province in the Roman Empire. Those provincial governors assigned to that region of the world were often thought to have received hardship posts. Too, those who wrote the history of Rome were in the upper strata of Roman society and usually had a personal dislike of Orientals, disapproved of their religions and looked upon their superstitions as very un-Roman.2 This partially accounts for the little trickles of information that comes from their pens about the Christian religion. They wrote about it only as it forced its way into the mainstream of their view. Yet what they did write is proof positive that Jesus Christ was both a real person and that he had made such an impact upon society that the Roman world found it increasingly difficult to disregard him.

2. Ibid., p. 12.

1. Thallus
Our initial witness makes a contribution of a unique sort inasmuch as he had no
intention

 

I'm not going to read that at the moment, for a variety of reasons (not the least being that I'm not feeling well), but I'll note that there are scholarly arguments on both sides, and that I somehow doubt that the debate will be solved in this forum.

But, you never know .

 

"Jesus is historically confirmed as having lived, so his story is the truth. "




You win. I can't debate with someone like you.

 

""Jesus is historically confirmed as having lived, so his story is the truth."

You might as well say "Davy Crockett is historically confirmed as having lived, so he killed a bear at age 3."

 

""Jesus is historically confirmed as having lived, so his story is the truth. "
You win. I can't debate with someone like you."

.
.
.

I don't see a need for sarcasm when you realize you're wrong and you can't make a good argument. You're using sarcasm as a replacement for a logical argument....because no logical argument against Jesus' existence exists.

PERHAPS you should look farther than my summary statement, CYDONIA....that just might be a good idea! Then you can try to really debate me....



About the whole Davy Crocket thing ......C'mon! I even posted non-Christian/pagan historical sources/people that say Jesus existed! Not only that, but the same sources say that He resurrected!!




You're arguing with Christian, Jewish, and PAGAN historians who all say the SAME THING, including the RESURRECTION!


As far as some historians disagreeing that Jesus existed.....I disagree that Bill Clinton was impeached, even though all historical sources say so!

Hmmm.......I think I'll use some SARCASM to try to insult someone rather than actually debating on the subject!

 

I don't see a need for sarcasm when you realize you're wrong and you can't make a good argument. You're using sarcasm as a replacement for a logical argument....because no logical argument against Jesus' existence exists.

Please. I wasn't being sarcastic anyway. I was being honest. I can't debate with someone like you because your arrogance is just spectacular. So, you win. Happy?

 

First off, allow me to point out that all of the sources you mention were written by authors not yet born at the time of Christ's supposed death. Therefore, their stories can only have come from hearsay; rather than eyewitness accounts, these are stories of stories.

Second and more importantly, only one of these sources (besides Thallus, who is never quoted directly and is instead filtered through a separate, Christian author--again, hearsay) sees fit to mention any of Christ's miracles--or his resurrection, for that matter. That one passage, from the works of Josephus, has been called into question numerous times and on numerous counts--and with good cause.

Josephus was the most comprehensive historian of his day, devoting full pages to individual commoners, and as many as forty pages to individual kings. Jesus, "the Messiah" as the passage describes him, gets one single paragraph. Not only that, but the paragraph completely interrupts its context (the following paragraph begins, "But the Jews would soon face an even worse threat..."--Worse than Jesus?), strongly suggesting that it was wedged into the text long after the fact. Early Catholic scholars remarked that Josephus left no writings of Christ--why would they say so, if the passage was there the whole time?

The Roman passages, while less questionable in their own right, do little to paint a comprehensive portrait of the man; all they describe is a Christ/Chrestus/Christus (never once referred to as Jesus), a troublemaker among Jews who founded a following and eventually faced crucifixion at the hands of Pilate. Such figures were common at the time--there were many unhappy with Roman rule--as were would-be Messiahs.

Now speaking of Pilate, the question arises of why such a historically ruthless enforcer would suddenly become an effeminate wimp who initially refuses to crucify Jesus, offers to free him as per a holiday custom never referred to anywhere else, and finally capitulates to a mob of conquered peons, all of which simultaneously cry out, "Let it be on us, and on our children!" Perhaps the Gospel authors sought to frighten the Jews into conversion by blaming all of them for Christ's death?

Perhaps the most important question of all: How did Jesus, a leader of thousands and a worker of epic-scale miracles, go completely unnoticed by every historian of his own time? Despite a plethora of highly prolific historians from precisely the time of Christ's supposed life, none of them left a single record of his existence. Why is that?

 

Satan destroyed all their first hand accounts?

 

There are historians....

They're called Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

Tell me which historians in Jerusalem didn't write about Jesus.


Oh, and Cydonia - You see me listing thoroughly proving my beliefs with historical references as being arogant?


Bah - I do not wish to discuss this in a committee.....especially one where people will just bicker and argue and stick by their guns the whole time. There is no point in a debate where both sides believe their facts so strongly that they will never change them.

What, you thought that people who DIDN'T have strong opinions would actually read and post on this thread?


Feel free to continue the never-ending, never-changing arguments.

 

your response, Fat_Fett, is typical for a follower of the Christian faith ? it is clear that Christianity adopted many of the myths/fables that its religious predecessors used to convey spiritual morality, authenticity, ethical behavior, and probability. claiming that the similarities are just a trick of the "Devil" is an example of an "excuse", a religious "loop hole", a literal ?scapegoat? ? it allows Christianity to perpetuate an assumption that it is authentic over any others, which, IMO, is irresponsible, and lazy?

you, simply, cannot prove that "Satan" master minded the "diabolical mimicry" plot. in fact, you have NO proof that an entity called ?Satan? actually exists outside of the myth that is Christianity - all you can do, as a matter of fact, is rely on your own opinions, convictions, experience, conjecture, speculation, hope, and faith to base your arguments... which is fine ? if you believe in an embodiment of evil, and it provides a model of how not to be, then more power to you!

Fat_Fett wrote:
"Jesus is historically confirmed as having lived, so his story is the truth."

no. i'm afraid you are being too zealous in your use of the word "confirmed" - because the existence of Jesus has not been "confirmed"
the fact is that if there was indisputable evidence, this exchange would not be necessary, or even likely
believing in Jesus, and that he was sacrificed/resurrected to atone for your sins, is a matter of Faith ? your faith, to be precise.

you provided some interesting information to try to back your claim about the facts of Jesus? life, so i thought i should provide the appropriate refutation to that? of course, this is probably a moot point, as anything i say you will try to refute as well? i guess we?ll just have to either agree to disagree, or continue this cycle of prove/disprove until our fingers are riddled with arthritis? or until you admit that i?m right

"Did Jesus Really Live" by Marshall J. Gauvin

John E. Remsburg, in his scholarly work on "The Christ," has compiled a list of forty-two writers who lived and wrote during the time or within a century after the time, of Christ, not one of whom ever mentioned him.

Philo, one of the most renowned writers the Jewish race has produced, was born before the beginning of the Christian Era, and lived for many years after the time at which Jesus is supposed to have died. His home was in or near Jerusalem, where Jesus is said to have preached, to have performed miracles, to have been crucified, and to have risen from the dead. Had Jesus done these things, the writings of Philo would certainly contain some record of his life. Yet this philosopher, who must have been familiar with Herod's massacre of the innocents, and with the preaching, miracles and death of Jesus, had these things occurred; who wrote an account of the Jews, covering this period, and discussed the very questions that are said to have been near to Christ's heart, never once mentioned the name of, or any deed connected with, the reputed Savior of the world.

In the closing years of the first century, Josephus, the celebrated Jewish historian, wrote his famous work on "The Antiquities of the Jews." In this work, the historian made no mention of Christ, and for two hundred years after the death of Josephus, the name of Christ did not appear in his history. There were no printing presses in those days. Books were multiplied by being copied. It was, therefore, easy to add to or change what an author had written. The church felt that Josephus ought to recognize Christ, and the dead historian was made to do it. In the fourth century, a copy of "The Antiquities of the Jews" appeared, in which occurred this passage: "Now, there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works; a teacher of such men as received the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Ge

 

Keeping with Darth Geists's point, here's an excerpt from the jesus mysteries, typed by your friendly neighborhood cydonia.


We began our quest for the historical Jesus with the Romans. Jesus is said to have been crucified by the romans and they were renowned for keeping careful records of all their activities, especially their legal proceedings, so we felt we could be optimistic that they would mention such a celebrated case as that of Jesus. Unfortunately, however, there is no record of Jesus being tried by Pontious Pilate or executed.

This was an extremely literate period in human history. Here is a list of Pagan writers who wrote at or within a century of the time Jesus is said to have lived:

Arrian
Petronius
Seneca
Dion Pruseus
Pliny the Elder
Appian
Juvenal
Theon of Smyrna
Martial
Plutarch
Appolonius
Pausanias
Valerius Flaccus
Florus Lucius
Quintilian
Favorinus
Lucanus
Damis
Silius Italicus
Aulus Gellius
Statius
Colemella
Ptolemy
Dio Chrysostom
Hermogeones
Lysias
Valerius Maximus

The works of these writers would be enough to fill a library, but not one of them Refers to Jesus.

I think the amount of journalists who reported on the Clinton trial are much greater than the preceding list.

 

Good points all, Kerr_Plunk, and I'd like to restate, as you've pointed out, that Herod's massacre does not appear anywhere outside of Matthew. Again, why?

 

Oh, and Cydonia - You see me listing thoroughly proving my beliefs with historical references as being arogant?

Well, come to think of it that is pretty arrogant statement in itself, but no, that's not what i was referring to. This:

I don't see a need for sarcasm when you realize you're wrong and you can't make a good argument. You're using sarcasm as a replacement for a logical argument....because no logical argument against Jesus' existence exists.

Glad to know you can see into the depths of my mind. You're one of the first.

Anyway i don't want to argue with you. No point, no need.

 

Darth Geist wrote:
"Herod's massacre does not appear anywhere outside of Matthew. Again, why?"

[church_lady] Could it be.... SATAN?![/church_lady]*

*hoping that the humor has not been lost to those who are not familiar with the "church lady" from SNL circa mid to late 80's

 

you, simply, cannot prove that "Satan" master minded the "diabolical mimicry" plot. in fact, you have NO proof that an entity called ?Satan? actually exists outside of the myth that is Christianity -

An excellent book about this is The Origin of Satan by Elaine Pagels. I reccomend the heck out of it.

Edit- "Well isn't that Special!"

 

cydonia wrote:
"An excellent book about this is The Origin of Satan by Elaine Pagels. I reccomend the heck out of it."

oh, yes... i know
i own a copy myself

have you ever read "Ken's Guide to the Bible" by Ken Smith?