• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Is Religious Faith a Choice

  • Yes it is!

    Votes: 16 34.8%
  • No it is not!

    Votes: 10 21.7%
  • Yes and No, I can explain.

    Votes: 18 39.1%
  • I am Undecided

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I offer Quotes from a Faith to demonstrate.

    Votes: 2 4.3%
  • I offer my thoughts of faith in response.

    Votes: 4 8.7%

  • Total voters
    46

joelr

Well-Known Member
Jews don't believe in a saviour demi-god, but that is irrelevant.

During the 2nd Temple Period they were influenced by the Persian myths. They began writing prophecies that they would be getting their own savior.

It backs up what Orthodox Rabbis have been teaching for many centuries. Your claim that belief in an afterlife only started in the hellenistic era .. it is pure assumption. I have shown you verses that show eternal life and eternal contempt. The words heaven and hell do NOT have to be employed .. it is the same thing !

NO I said what we know to be true. In Judaism the only afterlife was wandering around sheol.
After they were Hellenized they adopted the beliefs in everyone having a soul that can be fallen, redeemed and belongs in Heaven. I am going by all facts.
The Hellenized beliefs entered Jusism during the 2nd Temple Period.
Re-read the list I provided. That list of Hellenistic concepts literally predicts Christainity. Those are facts.


..that is true .. but not in the case of an afterlife.
The concepts of an afterlife where your soul originates in heaven and can be redeemed and return there. That is a Hellenistic idea. Older religions including Judaism did not have this concept.

During the period of the Second Temple (c. 515 BC – 70 AD), the Hebrew people lived under the rule of first the Persian Achaemenid Empire, then the Greek kingdoms of the Diadochi, and finally the Roman Empire.[47] Their culture was profoundly influenced by those of the peoples who ruled them.[47] Consequently, their views on existence after death were profoundly shaped by the ideas of the Persians, Greeks, and Romans.[48][49] The idea of the immortality of the soul is derived from Greek philosophy[49] and the idea of the resurrection of the dead is derived from Persian cosmology.[49] By the early first century AD, these two seemingly incompatible ideas were often conflated by Hebrew thinkers.[49] The Hebrews also inherited from the Persians, Greeks, and Romans the idea that the human soul originates in the divine realm and seeks to return there.[47] The idea that a human soul belongs in Heaven and that Earth is merely a temporary abode in which the soul is tested to prove its worthiness became increasingly popular during the Hellenistic period (323 – 31 BC).[40] Gradually, some Hebrews began to adopt the idea of Heaven as the eternal home of the righteous dead.[40]

If you want historical details read the books I listed.



I am not denying the existence of hellenistic Judaism. Paul of Tarsus is thought to have been influenced by hellenism, for example.
..and Philo, with his 'logos' most certainly was.

Yes and so are savior demigods, national Gods being upgraded to supreme Gods, and the long list of things I tok time to pick out of the Hellenism article from Briticannica.
Sanders and Wright echo these details in their work as does Carrier.



The above is problematic, in that it assumes that Jews had never believed in an afterlife before the Persians, Greeks, and Romans came along..
I understand that the Pharisees [ which evolved into modern, orthodox Judaism ] DID believe in an afterlife .. but not the Sadducees.
The reason for their belief in an afterlife could be associated with hellenism, but it is only an assumption that Jews didn't believe in an afterlife before their influence.
An incorrect one at that .. which I have demonstrated by scriptural excerpts of the Prophets in the OT.

vhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaven

"n line with the typical view of most Near Eastern cultures, the Hebrew Bible depicts Heaven as a place that is inaccessible to humans."

All Biblical mentions of afterlife are spirits wandering around SHeol. Hellenism introduced a more popular myth that everyone gets to go to heaven.
You keep making this strawman that there was no afterlife in Judaism? There was but it was nothing like all of the upgrades Hellenism brought.
The Persian occupation also brought many changes in theology. Between Hellenism and Persian thought the is the bulk of Christian theology.

Early Israel also has Ashera as a consort of Yahweh. During the 2nd Temple Period the Hebrews tried to understand why they kept being defeated (even though Yahweh promised otherwise). They saw the Persians had one main God and decided their big sin was they were not being Yahweh specific enough. This is the period the OT was canonized and strict Yahweh worship began.


"Zoroastrianism exalts an uncreated and benevolent deity of wisdom, Ahura Mazda (Wise Lord), as its supreme being.[4] The unique historical features of Zoroastrianism, such as its monotheism,[5][6][7][8][9] messianism, judgment after death, heaven and hell, and free will may have influenced other religious and philosophical systems, including Second Temple Judaism, Gnosticism, Greek philosophy,[10] Christianity, Islam,[11] and the Baháʼí Faith.

The Persian kings allowed the Hebrew religious leaders to return from exile and the Israelites were influenced by their kindness and their theology.

At 3:10 OT Professor details this period
 

muhammad_isa

Veteran Member
NO I said what we know to be true. In Judaism the only afterlife was wandering around sheol.
After they were Hellenized they adopted the beliefs in everyone having a soul that can be fallen, redeemed and belongs in Heaven. I am going by all facts.
The Hellenized beliefs entered Jusism during the 2nd Temple Period..

..just repeating that something is a fact, doesn't make it so :)

The concepts of an afterlife where your soul originates in heaven and can be redeemed and return there. That is a Hellenistic idea. Older religions including Judaism did not have this concept..

This is an assumption, which I disagree with.

Early Israel also has Ashera as a consort of Yahweh. During the 2nd Temple Period the Hebrews tried to understand why they kept being defeated (even though Yahweh promised otherwise). They saw the Persians had one main God and decided their big sin was they were not being Yahweh specific enough. This is the period the OT was canonized and strict Yahweh worship began..

Israel's beliefs kept changing all the time during its history.
Many historians are correct in their observation of varying beliefs.
However, that does NOT mean that Moses and subsequent prophets did not teach about an afterlife.
Modern orthodox Jews believe in an afterlife.
I suppose you are claiming that they believe this due to hellenisation?
I think not !

Why did God repeatedly send prophets to "bani Israel"?
That would be to correct and protect "the faith", as over time ignorance and misbelief creeps in. They didn't have the situation that we have today
eg. a modern, advanced civilisation .. widespread education

Jesus and Muhammad have had a significant influence on the civilisation of mankind.
May God bestow peace on them both.
 

Sheldon

Veteran Member
Jews don't believe in a saviour demi-god, but that is irrelevant.

It backs up what Orthodox Rabbis have been teaching for many centuries. Your claim that belief in an afterlife only started in the hellenistic era .. it is pure assumption. I have shown you verses that show eternal life and eternal contempt. The words heaven and hell do NOT have to be employed .. it is the same thing !


..that is true .. but not in the case of an afterlife.

You owe me one irony meter....



I am not denying the existence of hellenistic Judaism. Paul of Tarsus is thought to have been influenced by hellenism, for example.
..and Philo, with his 'logos' most certainly was.


I have no argument with that.



The above is problematic, in that it assumes that Jews had never believed in an afterlife before the Persians, Greeks, and Romans came along..
I understand that the Pharisees [ which evolved into modern, orthodox Judaism ] DID believe in an afterlife .. but not the Sadducees.
The reason for their belief in an afterlife could be associated with hellenism, but it is only an assumption that Jews didn't believe in an afterlife before their influence.
An incorrect one at that .. which I have demonstrated by scriptural excerpts of the Prophets in the OT.
Jews don't believe in a saviour demi-god, but that is irrelevant.

It backs up what Orthodox Rabbis have been teaching for many centuries. Your claim that belief in an afterlife only started in the hellenistic era .. it is pure assumption. I have shown you verses that show eternal life and eternal contempt. The words heaven and hell do NOT have to be employed .. it is the same thing !


..that is true .. but not in the case of an afterlife.



I am not denying the existence of hellenistic Judaism. Paul of Tarsus is thought to have been influenced by hellenism, for example.
..and Philo, with his 'logos' most certainly was.


I have no argument with that.



The above is problematic, in that it assumes that Jews had never believed in an afterlife before the Persians, Greeks, and Romans came along..
I understand that the Pharisees [ which evolved into modern, orthodox Judaism ] DID believe in an afterlife .. but not the Sadducees.
The reason for their belief in an afterlife could be associated with hellenism, but it is only an assumption that Jews didn't believe in an afterlife before their influence.
An incorrect one at that .. which I have demonstrated by scriptural excerpts of the Prophets in the OT.
..just repeating that something is a fact, doesn't make it so
 

joelr

Well-Known Member
..just repeating that something is a fact, doesn't make it so :)
I'm repeating historical facts. The OT is clear about what heaven is for. People did not go there after death. Souls who all go to heaven is a Hellenization of Judaism. These beliefs were adopted from the Greeks while the Greeks occupied Israel?

This is an assumption, which I disagree with.

Disagreeing with facts just means you are wrong. Why would you even bother? I assume this must go against some personal beliefs so you cannot accept them? It isn't just the consensus of historians as to where heaven/souls comes from? The OT is CLEAR on that theology??? For ~900 years there is no biblical mention of heaven as an afterlife destination???????????


I have read the OT many times. These quotes are accurate and sum up the beliefs about heaven in the OT:

"n line with the typical view of most Near Eastern cultures, the Hebrew Bible depicts Heaven as a place that is inaccessible to humans."
There is almost no mention in the Hebrew Bible of Heaven as a possible afterlife destination for human beings, who are instead described as "resting" in Sheol"

You keep saying you disagree but fail to provide evidence? In the OT theology people did not go to heaven as an afterlife? 2 people were taken there in 2 different myths in the OT. for different reasons. But heaven as an afterlife destination was not Jewish theology.
Heaven as an afterlife destination was introduced to Hebrew religious leaders during the 2nd Temple Period. I linked Professor F. S. explaining some of this. Scholars Sanders and Wright specialize in this period.
There is another historical book on heaven that traces the concepts through the same religions?

This is where the Hebrew religious leaders got the ideas - "By the early first century AD, these two seemingly incompatible ideas were often conflated by Hebrew thinkers.[49] The Hebrews also inherited from the Persians, Greeks, and Romans the idea that the human soul originates in the divine realm and seeks to return there.[47] The idea that a human soul belongs in Heaven and that Earth is merely a temporary abode in which the soul is tested to prove its worthiness became increasingly popular during the Hellenistic period (323 – 31 BC).[40] Gradually, some Hebrews began to adopt the idea of Heaven as the eternal home of the righteous dead.[40]"


Before this the dead rested in SHeol. There is no other version of history?


Israel's beliefs kept changing all the time during its history.
Many historians are correct in their observation of varying beliefs.
However, that does NOT mean that Moses and subsequent prophets did not teach about an afterlife.
Modern orthodox Jews believe in an afterlife.
I suppose you are claiming that they believe this due to hellenisation?
I think not !

First Moses is widely considered a mythical character in history.
Yes, the Israelite religion underwent religious syncretism during the 2nd Temple Period and adopted Hellenistic beliefs. Why would this be so hard to understand? All religious go through syncretism constantly?
Again, these are historical facts? Just because they are not discussed in church and in religious circles doesn't mean they are not accepted as true in academia.

Here - yet another scholar explaining that by the time of the Rabbi they were beginning to accept they would go to heaven as a destination and this also probably came from GREEK MYTHS!!!
Resurrection at the end of time = Persian. Souls go to heaven = GREEK.

"While the concept of Heaven (malkuth hashamaim מלכות השמים, the Kingdom of Heaven) is much discussed in Christian thought, the Jewish concept of the afterlife, sometimes known as olam haba, the World-to-come, is not discussed so often. The Torah has little to say on the subject of survival after death, but by the time of the rabbis two ideas had made inroads among the Jews: one, which is probably derived from Greek thought,[81] is that of the immortal soul which returns to its creator after death; the other, which is thought to be of Persian origin,[81] is that of resurrection of the dead."

Yes, Jewish afterlife ideas after the 2nd Temple Period are Persian and Greek.

This quote from another Jewish historian.
You "think not" because religions and churches do not announce that during certain eras they incorporated myths from other cultures. Religions cannot admit this because it would mean they are also myths. Well, they are all myths.

Also why would you just assume all these scholars are wrong? Why not read what the actual evidence is and make an educated decision? Rather than one based on what you want to be true?

Wright, J. Edward (2000), The Early History of Heaven, Oxford, England: Oxford University Press,


Why did God repeatedly send prophets to "bani Israel"?
That would be to correct and protect "the faith", as over time ignorance and misbelief creeps in. They didn't have the situation that we have today
eg. a modern, advanced civilisation .. widespread education

God doesn't send prophets. People borrow older myths and make new religions and claim a God is sending them messages. The OT myths mirror Mesopotamian myths until the 2nd Temple Period where Greek/Persian myths take over. This is widely understood in history. Genesis was written by one or more authors using older legends and stories already common to create a religion for a new people.




Jesus and Muhammad have had a significant influence on the civilisation of mankind.
May God bestow peace on them both.


Dying/rising savior demigods are another Greek creation added to most religions in that time and region. Several prior to Jesus.
Rabbi Hilell was teaching the same wisdom before Jesus.
Krishna and Buddha also influenced billions of people. So did Scientology the Law of Attraction and all sorts of new-age gurus. Sai Baba influenced millions in India and has millions of eyewittnesses to miracles in the late 1800's. So what? None of them are actually in supernatural connection to a God. There is also no evidence for theistic Gods. This is all religious mythology.

What exactly significant influence do you even think Jesus even had?
Hillel the Elder - Wikipedia - Hillel was teaching all of the good aspects of those teachings, So were the Greeks and Hindus, Persians and so on? Be a good person? You can learn that from Luke Skywalker?
You need Jesus to get to heaven? That is Hellenism and a total myth. Religions prior to that were not obsessed with afterlife entry because they knew it wasn't real.
 
Last edited:

muhammad_isa

Veteran Member
I'm repeating historical facts. The OT is clear about what heaven is for. People did not go there after death.

I don't think so. Heaven and hell are concepts. The words "heaven and hell" do not have to be specifically mentioned.

1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.
2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

3 And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.
-Daniel 12-

18 We have been with child, we have been in pain, we have as it were brought forth wind; we have not wrought any deliverance in the earth; neither have the inhabitants of the world fallen.
19 Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust: for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead.

-Isaiah 26-

12 Therefore prophesy and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God; Behold, O my people, I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel.
13 And ye shall know that I am the Lord, when I have opened your graves, O my people, and brought you up out of your graves,
14 And shall put my spirit in you, and ye shall live, and I shall place you in your own land: then shall ye know that I the Lord have spoken it, and performed it, saith the Lord.

-Ezekiel 37-

The above suggests that we "arise from the dead, and live once more".

God doesn't send prophets. People borrow older myths and make new religions and claim a God is sending them messages. The OT myths mirror Mesopotamian myths until the 2nd Temple Period where Greek/Persian myths take over. This is widely understood in history. Genesis was written by one or more authors using older legends and stories already common to create a religion for a new people..

I would agree that Genesis is not "a revelation" in the accepted meaning of the word, and is a revised writing of several earlier texts [or myths].
That does NOT mean that the prophets of the OT did not exist. That is YOUR belief .. not mine.
 
Last edited:

rational experiences

Veteran Member
Father said science ignored that earth had two laws given by sun nuclear radiation metals. Suns owned big bang blast.

Why recording is universal. A state.

Creation of dusts as separation in fusion of crystalline mass. Occurred.

And melt. Occurred.

Then earth flooded. Evaporation increases flood. Mountains arose. Then ground became bare and naked.

Garden nature first.

The after ice age temple science was philosophers stone gold a melt. Thesis for melt.

It ended in a ground nature dust nuclear reaction.

Two sun causes.

Was the teaching.

In Israel like devils triangle and Japan devils sea a green methane gas released... the same occurred to their ground mass. A high chemical ground change erupted. Chemical conversions of ground dusts.

Reason for dead sea and water displaced.

The entombed in God O earth is a human thought personal belief about gods earth mass. You did a calculus about stone mass yet your body and your consciousness inferred it.

Theist equals life presence owns part of the teaching why. Calculus you said O gods maths. Cause effect anti of life theist caused.

Relating to phenomena as anti effects.

The confession was seen...spirits emerged out of ground dust as and in human image as human designers caused the reaction. Phenomena.

So man's image formed out of the dust reaction in cooling. Seen to discuss the effect.

What was seen. I saw a similar effect myself.

O God maths is about crop circle manifestations. O man said was once gods soul held in the heavens only.

Not falling.

Crops flattened in pressure changes of cooling radiation plus water evaporation from began out of the ground mass....cooling....
Leaving coming back. O caused attack.

Calculations it said. Reasoning.

Whilst any gas change was a gas change occurring just as changed gases.

Leaving the stone mass as entombed gas bodies...was spirit in a human scientific explanation.

As you have to ask was spirit definition defined first in science practice! No the answer it was conjured.

Science was first theories for machines and reactions to mass. By human control first. In the machine only.

Why it is difficult to understand as they never truly understood it either as it was not science.

Artificial means owning a portion described as scientific advice the rest cause and effect only.

How can you describe earth changes that were not meant to occur?

Science termed it artificial causes.

Explained to their best ability as witnessed earth body changes to the emptying of mass by gas spirit into sin holes.
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
So you don't think his education had anything to do with this - his choice as to accepting such evidence?

One chooses what to believe about what he is taught. I can remember studying with the JWs. I chose to listen to the Holy Spirit when He differed from what they taught.
 

TransmutingSoul

One Planet, One People, Please!
Premium Member
One chooses what to believe about what he is taught. I can remember studying with the JWs. I chose to listen to the Holy Spirit when He differed from what they taught.

I believe somewhere along the line we learn that some people seek to deceive, so every teaching has to be examined so a choice can be made to believe or not.

That is the quandary of Choice. We have to learn what is God's Will for us, by subduing what we think God's Will is.

Lack of faith can blind us, misguided faith can blind us, life is indeed a great test.

Regards Tony
 

Sheldon

Veteran Member
That is the quandary of Choice. We have to learn what is God's Will for us, by subduing what we think God's Will is.

Lack of faith can blind us, misguided faith can blind us, life is indeed a great test.

Regards Tony
Yes, theists all conveniently believe they're choices are endorsed by a deity, if a deity did exist it would be almost as maligned as Einstein at being misquoted, or at being quoted out of context.
 

TransmutingSoul

One Planet, One People, Please!
Premium Member
Yes, theists all conveniently believe they're choices are endorsed by a deity, if a deity did exist it would be almost as maligned as Einstein at being misquoted, or at being quoted out of context.

We are talking about good and bad choices, not just good choices.

God does not make the choices for us.

How can justice prevail if that was the case? There would be nothing to base justice upon. No one in court could be held responsible for their choice, though that is what many try to do, they cop out and say the drugs or alcohol I was consuming was responsible, not me, never me.

Regards Tony
 

Sheldon

Veteran Member
We are talking about good and bad choices, not just good choices.

God does not make the choices for us.

How can justice prevail if that was the case? There would be nothing to base justice upon. No one in court could be held responsible for their choice, though that is what many try to do, they cop out and say the drugs or alcohol I was consuming was responsible, not me, never me.

Regards Tony
You've lost me sorry, you said:

That is the quandary of Choice. We have to learn what is God's Will for us, by subduing what we think God's Will is.

Lack of faith can blind us, misguided faith can blind us, life is indeed a great test.

Regards Tony

I just observed that your comment about knowing god's will, is a common claim different theists make, that they know what a deity wants.
 

rational experiences

Veteran Member
We came out of the eternal unconditional loving body.

As parents.

In their human presence we manifested as sperm ovary.

Our conscious memories where we came from limited.

When I said in my mind where a human says I talk to spirit I said prove to me that you are real or I won't believe.

An answer said I had to live a spiritual life to have it proven.

So humans identify spiritual behaviours.

I had it proven.

Science says the same except you use machines.

Spirit is natural not any machine so science why don't you give up trying to tell us how we should think as controlled indoctrination by Multi controlled groups!
 

joelr

Well-Known Member
I don't think so. Heaven and hell are concepts. The words "heaven and hell" do not have to be specifically mentioned.

It is a known fact in historicity that the Hebrew religion was influenced by Persian and Greek cultures. No historian doubts this. Apologists may sometime try different methods of denial or just saying "I don't think so" without ever actually learning the historical arguments and evidence that gives historians the reasons for saying this.


1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.
2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

3 And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.

-Daniel 12-



Daniel is widely known in scholarship to be a forgery. Butu tyhat aside it's written after the start of the 2nd Temple Period? This period started around 500BC and is the time the Israelites were invaded by the PErsians and then the Greeks.

"The Book of Daniel is a 2nd-century BCE biblical apocalypse with a 6th century BCE setting.[1
The obvious conclusion is that the account must have been completed near the end of the reign of Antiochus but before his death in December 164 BCE, or at least before news of it reached Jerusalem, and the consensus of modern scholarship is accordingly that the book dates to the period 167–163 BCE"



18 We have been with child, we have been in pain, we have as it were brought forth wind; we have not wrought any deliverance in the earth; neither have the inhabitants of the world fallen.
19 Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust: for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead.

-Isaiah 26-

12 Therefore prophesy and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God; Behold, O my people, I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel.
13 And ye shall know that I am the Lord, when I have opened your graves, O my people, and brought you up out of your graves,
14 And shall put my spirit in you, and ye shall live, and I shall place you in your own land: then shall ye know that I the Lord have spoken it, and performed it, saith the Lord.

-Ezekiel 37-

The above suggests that we "arise from the dead, and live once more".

This isn't heaven. It suggests resurrection but it specifically mentions you will be in Israel. This backs up the idea that many scholars have that this is a metaphor for the resurrection of Israel.
"he first explicit mention of resurrection is the Vision of the Valley of Dry Bones in the Book of Ezekiel. Some believe that this narrative was intended as a metaphor for national rebirth, promising the Jews return to Israel and reconstruction of the Temple, not as a description of personal resurrection.["

But Israel was already being influenced by other cultures in the 6th century. Historian Alan Segal writes about this in the history of afterlife in religion.

"Greek and Persian culture influenced Jewish sects to believe in an afterlife between the 6th and 4th centuries BCE as well.["


I would agree that Genesis is not "a revelation" in the accepted meaning of the word, and is a revised writing of several earlier texts [or myths].
That does NOT mean that the prophets of the OT did not exist. That is YOUR belief .. not mine.

It's consensus in historical fields that Moses and the Patriarchs are mythical creations. Thomas Thompson's work in the 70's settled that debate. Besides that all of the Moses stories are re-hashed Egyptian myths there are many other lines of evidence Thompson demonstrated to make his point. Most OT stories mirror Mesopotamian myths. archeologists are now certain that there was no Exodus and Israel emerged peacefully out of Canaanite culture.
 

muhammad_isa

Veteran Member
It is a known fact in historicity that the Hebrew religion was influenced by Persian and Greek cultures. No historian doubts this..

Neither do I. What's there to doubt?
Hellenistic influence was rife in the time of Jesus.
Jesus did not follow these Hellenistic tendencies
eg. He did not mention a "logos" or teach Philo's understandings

Daniel is widely known in scholarship to be a forgery. Butu tyhat aside it's written after the start of the 2nd Temple Period? This period started around 500BC and is the time the Israelites were invaded by the PErsians and then the Greeks.

"The Book of Daniel is a 2nd-century BCE biblical apocalypse with a 6th century BCE setting."
The obvious conclusion is that the account must have been completed near the end of the reign of Antiochus but before his death in December 164 BCE, or at least before news of it reached Jerusalem, and the consensus of modern scholarship is accordingly that the book dates to the period 167–163 BCE"

So what?
Are you saying that Daniel lived in the 6th. century BCE, 2nd. century BGE .. or didn't exist at all?
What exactly?

It's consensus in historical fields that Moses and the Patriarchs are mythical creations..
yeah, right..
That cannot be proved, and the further we go back in time, the more we can't be sure.
Archeological digs and so forth are not evidence that Moses didn't exist. It is an opinion without proper evidence.
It it has not been proved BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT
that Moses did not exist.

..anyhow, what has this got to do with the OP?
 

joelr

Well-Known Member
Neither do I. What's there to doubt?
Hellenistic influence was rife in the time of Jesus.
Jesus did not follow these Hellenistic tendencies
eg. He did not mention a "logos" or teach Philo's understandings

Jesus is a Hellenistic creation? dying/rising savior demigods are from Hellenism? They undergo a passion, defeat death, get followers into an afterlife, that is a part of Hellenism?
All of the upgrades from Judaism were in the article on Hellenism I pointed out?
National Gods get updated to supreme
concern for individual salvation
savior demigods replace kings in religions
end of the world
souls go to heaven
Judaism was Hellenized like all the other religions in that region and time.



So what?
Are you saying that Daniel lived in the 6th. century BCE, 2nd. century BGE .. or didn't exist at all?
What exactly?

Christian scholarship has enough evidence to say that Daniel was written in the 2nd century BC and the story claims to take place in 6BC. It's fiction?


yeah, right..
That cannot be proved, and the further we go back in time, the more we can't be sure.
Archeological digs and so forth are not evidence that Moses didn't exist. It is an opinion without proper evidence.
It it has not been proved BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT
that Moses did not exist.
..anyhow, what has this got to do with the OP?

You are just taking a concept - archeological digs and assuming the entire argument is based on that? You are making a decision before you even understand any facts? That is the opposite of how to find truth?
Thompsons book has many lines of proof. When it was peer-reviewed it became standard because the work and arguments are sound.
He doesn't use archeological digs? The work is based on all sorts of lines of evidence. scholarship has continued on his work since and now these beliefs are standard in the field.

"according to William G. Dever, the modern scholarly consensus is that the biblical person of Moses is largely mythical

https://www.amazon.com/Historicity-...triarchs&qid=1637400746&s=digital-text&sr=1-1

"Going further, Thompson says that archaeological materials should never be dated or evaluated on the basis of written texts. Looking to the patriarchal narratives in Genesis, he concludes that these stories are neither historical nor were they intended to be historical. Instead, these narratives are written as expressions of Israel's relationship to God."

"Completely dismantles the historic patriarchal narratives. His impeccable scholarship, his astounding mastery of the sources, and rigorous detailed examination of the archaeological claims makes this book one I will immediately take with me in case of a flood. And it still hasn't been refuted.
Having stated, on page 1 of the Introduction of his book, the existing paradigm as it was in the early 1970s viz ""Nearly all [authors] accept the general claim that the historicity of the biblical traditions about the patriarchs has been substantiated by the archaeological and historical research of the last half-century" - Thompson then proceeds chapter by chapter to methodically and in great detail and with intricate scholarship to demolish that paradigm.
By the end of the book nothing remains of the assertion that the patriarchs actually existed as historical figures.
They are, as Thompson shows [and many other scholars since] part of a literary tradition written as expressions of religious faith, neither history nor ever intended to be so.
Thompson so conclusively demonstrated in this classic paradigm changing book that not only did archaeological research not substantiate the patriarchal stories, as described by apologists who allowed their faith to distort their research and conclusions, but that archaeology had actually refuted such claims.
So convincing and credible was his refuting of the old ideas that his PhD adviser, one Cardinal Ratzinger later pope Benedict, refused to ratify his PhD, from which this book is adapted, and Thompson was cast into an academic wilderness for many years until scholarship quite literally caught up.

This is a very important book, it swept away the accumulated dust of centuries and opened up a new, realistic, understanding of the past it described, an understanding that has thoroughly replaced the anachronism of the 'general claim' referred to in the opening line of the review"
 

joelr

Well-Known Member
Neither do I. What's there to doubt?
Hellenistic influence was rife in the time of Jesus.
Jesus did not follow these Hellenistic tendencies
eg. He did not mention a "logos" or teach Philo's understandings


Jesus = Hellenism


Hellenistic religion - the main points that are related to modern religious beliefs...These existed in Greek religion centuries before Christianity. All of these religious aspects combined with Judaism could have literally predicted Christianity before it happened.
That is what the 1st gospel is - a Hellenized Judaism with the savior demigod they were predicting (because they wanted one also). Other religions already had adopted these beliefs and some had dying/rising savior figures. Each was unique because each religion focused on certain things. The basic beliefs are what are similar.


"Each (religion prior to being Hellenized) persisted in its native land with little perceptible change save for its becoming linked to nationalistic or messianic movements (centring on a deliverer figure).
and apocalyptic traditions (referring to a belief in the dramatic intervention of a god in human and natural events) ...
his led to a change from concern for a religion of national prosperity to one for individual salvation, from focus on a particular ethnic group to concern for every human. The prophet or saviour replaced the priest and king as the chief religious figure.
(It wasn't just Judaism that was Hellenized. Petra Pakken has a book that details all the religions in that period that were Hellenized in a similar way)

...The first (or inner circle) was composed of devout, full-time adherents of the cult for whom the deity retained a separate and decisive identity (e.g., those of Yahweh, Zeus Serapis, and Isis).

The dominant feature of the concluding period of Hellenistic influence—and shortly thereafter—was the rapid growth of Christianity throughout the Roman Empire, culminating in the conversion to Christianity of the emperor Constantine in 313 and the religious legislation of the emperor Theodosius affirming in 380 the dogmas of the Christian Council of Nicaea—...

.....and it was this primordial act of salvation that was renewed and reexperienced in the cult.


They strove to regain their place in the world beyond this world where they truly belonged, to encounter the god beyond the god of this world who was the true god, and to awaken that part of themselves (their souls or spirits) that had descended from the heavenly realm by stripping off their bodies, which belonged to this world.


Other deities, who had previously been associated with national destiny (e.g., Zeus, Yahweh, and Isis), were raised to the status of transcendent, supreme deities whose power and ontological status (relating to being or existence) far surpassed the other gods,...


hese techniques for achieving ascent or a divine epiphany make up the bulk of the material that has usually been termed magical, theurgic (referring to the art of persuading a god to reveal himself and grant salvation, healing, and other requests), or astrological and that represents the characteristic expression of Hellenistic religiosity.


Rather than an expression of the alternation of life and death, of fertility and sterility, and a celebration of the promise of renewal for the land and the people, the seasonal drama was homologized to a soteriology (salvation concept) concerning the destiny, fortune, and salvation of the individual after death. The collective agricultural rite became a mystery, a salvific experience reserved for the elect (such as the Greek mystery religion of Eleusis). Other traditions even more radically reinterpreted the ancient figures. The cosmic or seasonal drama was interiorized to refer to the divine soul within man that must be liberated. -"

If one read this article before Christianity you could literally predict how the religion would emerge if you combine these ideas with OT theology. This is exactly what Mark did, using Paul, the OT and a few other sources.

So older versions of agricultural cycles were replaced with salvation of the soul and getting into Heaven. Christianity is one big Hellenized religion.

Prior to Hellenism people were not religious to get into an afterlife. That wasn't a thing. People didn't go to church, they just participated in cultic acts to gain favors like good weather. There was a popular saying that translated into something like "Before I was here I didn't care, now I am here, after I am gone I won't care anymore"
There is a lecture by Bart Ehrman that explains this in detail I can link to. So these are in fact Greek ideas blended into other religions. Savior demigods and afterlife entry are Greek myths.
 

muhammad_isa

Veteran Member
Jesus is a Hellenistic creation? dying/rising savior demigods are from Hellenism? They undergo a passion, defeat death, get followers into an afterlife, that is a part of Hellenism..

Ah, you are referring to orthodox Christianity, and not "Jesus".
I would agree with you re dying/rising savior demigods..
..but not regards an afterlife.

Christian scholarship has enough evidence to say that Daniel was written in the 2nd century BC and the story claims to take place in 6BC. It's fiction?

..doesn't answer my question..
Who was Daniel, and when was he SUPPOSED to have lived?

This is a very important book, it swept away the accumulated dust of centuries and opened up a new, realistic, understanding of the past it described, an understanding that has thoroughly replaced the anachronism of the 'general claim' referred to in the opening line of the review"

..important to you, but not me. :D
It offers little in the way of spiritual guidance.
I much prefer the Bible !

As I say, you can't prove Moses did not exist.
I am 100% sure of that .. because he DID exist, imo :D
 

muhammad_isa

Veteran Member
Prior to Hellenism people were not religious to get into an afterlife. That wasn't a thing. People didn't go to church, they just participated in cultic acts to gain favors like good weather. There was a popular saying that translated into something like "Before I was here I didn't care, now I am here, after I am gone I won't care anymore"
There is a lecture by Bart Ehrman that explains this in detail I can link to. So these are in fact Greek ideas blended into other religions. Savior demigods and afterlife entry are Greek myths.

Right .. Bart Erhman is an expert in Christian texts, and early Christianity.
I agree with what you say here to a large extent.
However .. you are making assumptions about ancient history, and extrapolating your atheistic beliefs to include the many centuries BEFORE early Christianity..
..much like your claims of non-existent prophets in the OT etc.

What is the title of the OP? CHOICE?

I make my choice, and you make yours.
Take care not to confuse "evidence" with your presuppositions.
 
Top