Page 18 of 89 FirstFirst ... 813141516171819202122232868 ... LastLast
Results 341 to 360 of 1780
  1. #341  
    Actually, most of the concepts of the bible were taken from prior religions. You can make the argument that they were stolen, or maybe they were right and religion was developing at the same pace as humanity. With so many different religions around the world I think you still have to differentiate religion from faith.
  2. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #342  
    Quote Originally Posted by cdritch24 View Post
    Actually, most of the concepts of the bible were taken from prior religions. You can make the argument that they were stolen, or maybe they were right and religion was developing at the same pace as humanity. With so many different religions around the world I think you still have to differentiate religion from faith.
    While your point about faith is correct, when compared to an absence of all religious faith (a chosen rejection in fact) it really isn't as important to make that distinction, because a specific element of a religion isn't what is in question, rather the question of religious faith in general--at least that is how it seems to me.

    "Taken" from prior Religions? Isn't that a subjective evaluation? I'm not saying it isn't possible, but isn't it also possible that these are shared concepts that are arrived at separately? Actually--you do seem to acknowledge this possibility, so no disagreement I suppose.

    Not that I've noted you saying this, but it seems to me that some people are very eager to place a lot of credence on the reliability of some Religions historical nature in order to attack the credibility of another--often in an attempt to dismiss the historical nature of another.

    For example there is one person in mind that seems quick to accept any theory contrary to a Christian claim regarding itself, automatically accepting that the other is true.

    KAM
  3. #343  
    Look up "Mithraism", Mithraism was one of the major religions of the Roman Empire. According to Mithraism, Mithra was called the son of God, was born of a virgin, had disciples, was crucified, rose from the dead on the third day, atoned for the sins of mankind, and returned to heaven. I am not trying to disprove the existence of God, but there are a lot of previous religions with the exact same concept. Could it not be that God appeals to people in a way they can understand at the time.
  4. #344  
    Quote Originally Posted by ryleyinstl View Post
    Not! The "devil/hell" was not present in religious texts until the nomadic monotheists ran into polytheists and borrowed the idea.
    Actually the first inclination of a devil came from Zoroaster, who was an ancient Persian prophet who founded the first world religion. He is believed to have lived in the seventh century BC. He is said to have received a vision from Ahura Mazda, the Wise Lord, who appointed him to preach the truth. Zoroaster began preaching his message of cosmic strife between Ahura Mazda, the God of Light, and Ahriman, the principle of evil. According to the prophet, man had been given the power to choose between good and evil. The end of the world would come when the forces of light would triumph and the saved souls rejoice in its victory.
  5. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #345  
    Quote Originally Posted by cdritch24 View Post
    Look up "Mithraism", Mithraism was one of the major religions of the Roman Empire. According to Mithraism, Mithra was called the son of God, was born of a virgin, had disciples, was crucified, rose from the dead on the third day, atoned for the sins of mankind, and returned to heaven. I am not trying to disprove the existence of God, but there are a lot of previous religions with the exact same concept. Could it not be that God appeals to people in a way they can understand at the time.
    There are two problems with your comparison: first, there is scant evidence that any of the similarities are based in fact. Second, the Cult of Mithras originated in the late First Century AD, after the doctrines of Christianity had already been formed.
  6. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #346  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    There are two problems with your comparison: first, there is scant evidence that any of the similarities are based in fact.
    Exactly the same problem holds true for Christianity.
    Second, the Cult of Mithras originated in the late First Century AD, after the doctrines of Christianity had already been formed.
    Then it must have been written like a week or so after the New Testament, because that's about the same time it was written.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  7. #347  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    There are two problems with your comparison: first, there is scant evidence that any of the similarities are based in fact. Second, the Cult of Mithras originated in the late First Century AD, after the doctrines of Christianity had already been formed.
    Mithra was a Persian god dating back to roughly 1400 B.C. It later sprang up in Rome after Christian times, with a severely different story to it. I agree with you on the part that any similarities to Christ or Christianity are mostly myth and there is "scant evidence" of this, just wanted people to do some research and learn a little about religion. There is also scant evidence of most of the stories in the bible.
  8. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #348  
    Quote Originally Posted by cdritch24 View Post
    Actually the first inclination of a devil came from Zoroaster, who was an ancient Persian prophet who founded the first world religion. He is believed to have lived in the seventh century BC. He is said to have received a vision from Ahura Mazda, the Wise Lord, who appointed him to preach the truth. Zoroaster began preaching his message of cosmic strife between Ahura Mazda, the God of Light, and Ahriman, the principle of evil. According to the prophet, man had been given the power to choose between good and evil. The end of the world would come when the forces of light would triumph and the saved souls rejoice in its victory.
    You might want to consult with Zaehner who believes there is really no discernible correlation between Christian and Zoroastrian eschatology.
  9. Xerlot's Avatar
    Posts
    8 Posts
    Global Posts
    10 Global Posts
    #349  
    You also need to look at the fact that there is viable proof of Jesus being alive in the time the Bible states he is and, that he was put to death on a cross. His body was also missing from the grave 3 days later. This is written by "secular" historians from the time. These other religions can not back up what they teach with anything but stories. At least the Bible can be said to shown to be historicaly correct.

    After this is when the faith part of christianity come into play. But that is more than can be said for most other ancient religions.
  10. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #350  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Exactly the same problem holds true for Christianity.
    That's a pretty sweeping statement.

    Then it must have been written like a week or so after the New Testament, because that's about the same time it was written.
    Pretty much nothing was written down about the cult of Mithras at the time of its practice. At least nothing that still exists.
  11. #351  
    Quote Originally Posted by cdritch24 View Post
    Look up "Mithraism", Mithraism was one of the major religions of the Roman Empire. According to Mithraism, Mithra was called the son of God, was born of a virgin, had disciples, was crucified, rose from the dead on the third day, atoned for the sins of mankind, and returned to heaven. I am not trying to disprove the existence of God, but there are a lot of previous religions with the exact same concept. Could it not be that God appeals to people in a way they can understand at the time.
    Comparing Jesus and Horus
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  12.    #352  
    Quote Originally Posted by sudoer View Post
    Here's another suggestion to think about that might help motivate discussion:
    Ignoring for a moment, the existence of a God or not, what do you think about the existence (or non-existence) of Hell (and why)?
    Maybe if I suggest a format (template) for answering my question:
    Does Hell Exist (or do you believe it does)? Yes/No/Maybe/DontKnow
    If hell came into existance, when?
    If hell went (or will go) out of existence, when?

    What do you consider "similar concepts (places/states) to hell?
    (for each of these, order by any pertinent logical relationship, ie: time/state/place)

    Citations of Sources:

    Additional comments:
    I'm hoping the above might facilitate easier discussion. -- thanks
    I'm both super! ... and a doer!
  13. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #354  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    That's a pretty sweeping statement.
    Not really. Unless you can provide factual evidence that Mary was a virgin, that he rose again from the dead, that he is the son of God. You seemed to imply that Christianity was based in factual evidence. It's my understanding that it's based on faith.
    Pretty much nothing was written down about the cult of Mithras at the time of its practice. At least nothing that still exists.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  14. #355  
    Quote Originally Posted by Xerlot View Post
    You also need to look at the fact that there is viable proof of Jesus being alive in the time the Bible states he is and, that he was put to death on a cross. His body was also missing from the grave 3 days later. This is written by "secular" historians from the time. These other religions can not back up what they teach with anything but stories. At least the Bible can be said to shown to be historicaly correct.
    I do not believe that there is historical evidence of Jesus being an actual person (some scholars believe he's an amalgam of several actual people). There are no artifacts, carpentry works, self-written manuscripts, or dwelling in which he lived. All evidence is based upon writings of others. There certainly is no historical evidence of the resurrection story.

    If you can point to evidence, I'd be interested in it. Otherwise, your statement about the other religions not being able to "back up what they teach with anything but stories" applies equally to the Christian religion.
    Last edited by Bujin; 02/18/2010 at 04:56 PM.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  15. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #356  
    Quote Originally Posted by ryleyinstl View Post
    The fact that you're here is all the proof I need tnat he exists, ryleyinstl!
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  16. #357  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    You might want to consult with Zaehner who believes there is really no discernible correlation between Christian and Zoroastrian eschatology.
    Like this. Zaehner thus discusses his mescaline experience in terms of a narrow view on religious mysticism. In short: Zaehner argues that only theistic mysticism is sacred and that all other mystical states must be profane or amoral. Accordingly, Zaehner ends his book with an ecstatic defense of the Christian trinity.
  17. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #358  
    Quote Originally Posted by Xerlot View Post
    You also need to look at the fact that there is viable proof of Jesus being alive in the time the Bible states he is and, that he was put to death on a cross. His body was also missing from the grave 3 days later. This is written by "secular" historians from the time. These other religions can not back up what they teach with anything but stories. At least the Bible can be said to shown to be historicaly correct.

    After this is when the faith part of christianity come into play. But that is more than can be said for most other ancient religions.
    These only prove what they say they are, not your conclusion. Please.... the body was missing from the grave 3 days later means ascention?

    All I'm saying is that Christianity is based on faith, not on facts. His having existed is not the same thing as his being God. I can point to secular sources that show that I lived and walked the earth in the 1950s.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  18. #359  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    I do not believe that there is historical evidence of Jesus being an actual person (some scholars believe he's an amalgam of several actual people). There are no artifacts, carpentry works, self-written manuscripts, or dwelling in which he lived. All evidence is based upon writings of others. There certainly is no historical evidence of the resurrection story.

    If you can point to evidence, I'd be interested in it. Otherwise, your statement about the other religions not being able to "back up what they teach with anything but stories" applies equally to the Christian religion.
    The Roman historian Josephus mentioned Christ several times while relating noteworthy civic events, including the execution of one named "James, the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ/Messiah" referring evidently to Jesus' brother James, leader of the early church and author of the New Testament book bearing his name.

    The new artifact is an ossuary, a medium-sized box in which human bones were placed for permanent burial after the flesh had all decayed away. This practice was employed for only a brief period of time from about B.C. 20 to A.D. 70. The box is made of a soft, chalky, limestone, common to the area. The contents have long since vanished.

    Most remarkably, an inscription has been etched into the side which reads, "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus" in the Aramaic script of the time. Careful studies, including scrutiny under a scanning electron microscope show the inscription to be genuine. The patina, or oxidized surface equally covers both box and the interior of the etched letters. The recognized expert on such matters, Dr. Andre Lemaire, concludes: "I am pleased to report that in my judgment it is genuinely ancient and not a fake."
  19. Xerlot's Avatar
    Posts
    8 Posts
    Global Posts
    10 Global Posts
    #360  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    These only prove what they say they are, not your conclusion. Please.... the body was missing from the grave 3 days later means ascention?

    All I'm saying is that Christianity is based on faith, not on facts. His having existed is not the same thing as his being God. I can point to secular sources that show that I lived and walked the earth in the 1950s.
    "These only prove what they say they are, not your conclusion. Please.... the body was missing from the grave 3 days later means ascention?

    All I'm saying is that Christianity is based on faith, not on facts. His having existed is not the same thing as his being God. I can point to secular sources that show that I lived and walked the earth in the 1950s. "

    Obviosly you did not understand my post. I stated clearly that beyond the facts that I presented is where faith is.

    "That's not to say that the historical Jesus didn't exist; merely to state that there is no physical evidence that supports it. If you can point to evidence, I'd be interested in it."

    Look into the writings of Joseophus he was a Jewish Saducce. So he had every reason to tell the world Jesus was a fake. Yet he documents that Jesus was alive, Crucified and missing from the grave.

Posting Permissions