Muffled
Jesus in me
I believe I am aware of your concept of evidence which is an arbitrary stricture.Now you are just making nonsensical claims. You do not even understand the concept of evidence. Are you brave enough to learn?
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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I believe I am aware of your concept of evidence which is an arbitrary stricture.Now you are just making nonsensical claims. You do not even understand the concept of evidence. Are you brave enough to learn?
I believe the theology is lacking a correct perspective. I believe it is man placing his experience of time into his interpretation of the Bible.Not with the Abrahamic religions as they are linear as well. However, what does happen in the Jewish & Christian scriptures is the use of what could be called "comparative flashback", correlating later events and sometimes people with earlier ones.
I believe the contrary is true. Archeology has confirmed many things from the bible. If there are differences that may be because the archeology has not caught up with the truth yet.Archaeological evidence doesn't support the Bible. It's a mythology and not literal.
Among all of the historical errors they must get a few things correct? We don't know if that is Yahweh from that religion. All religion is syncretic so they may have chosen an Egyptian deity to worship. If only Yahweh worship was desired when scripture was written and people were worshipping idols or goddesses then that would be true. YEs. So what? They report the leaders wanted one God and the people worshipped several, that does not mean any of the Gods are real? It means they finally recorded something accurate.
I know about it. It's used with archaeology. There are archaeologists who cannot accept their religion is myth and like apologists have to tap dance around evidence. As I sourced, Joel Baden explaining the consensus opinion, from DNA and from historical evidence Israel came from Canaan.
You cannot because he has a peer-reviewed 750 pg monograph, full of sources and footnotes, his work has been checked by peers in the field.
His review of the evidence has not been challenged by any qualified historians either. All I see are apologists attacking his character with ad-hom and reviews from theologians who literally didn't read the book. I can show you.
There is no evidence for Exodus ever. Not in any century. Archaeologists could see signs of forced invasion just as clear in older centuries. They do not.
Again you are basing things on non-peer-reviewed crank.
There is no evidence in the Bible, just stories. There is evidence many of the stories are taken from older stories.
Yeah, yeah, we all agree that the Bible and NT are man-made fiction. But then, what is the Baha'i Faith? Their claim is that all of the major religions were true, originally. But where's the evidence of any supposedly "true" original writings and teachings?Yes, as we both know there is a plethora of evidence that many stories in the Bible were taken from older stories, such as Greek mythology. As I explained in another thread, replace the name Jesus with Attis (the Phrygian-Greek god of vegetation), and you'll have a strikingly familiar savior story similar to that of Jesus, except the Greek myths about Attis are dated 1250 BCE, which predates the Bible and Christianity (see here). Furthermore, you could replace the name Jesus Christ with any of the other gods described in the following articles linked below, and you'll have more strikingly familiar stories that not only parallel the stories of his alleged crucifixion, death, and resurrection but also parallel other stories that have been written in the Bible about his supposed life on Earth. And, like the myths about Attis, these other stories about Christ-like figures from Greek mythology and other pagan religions predate both the Bible and Christianity. I recommend learning more about Jesus in comparative mythology. You can start here: Jesus in comparative mythology. In my opinion, these other accounts of Christlike figures demonstrate that paganism had a significant influence on the stories about Jesus and that Christianity's beliefs are not unique. I know that Christians like to claim that the Bible was divinely inspired by God and that Christianity is the only true religion, but I don't believe that is true based on the information provided in these articles and in other similar ones. Christianity, in my opinion, is a copycat religion.
10 Christ-Like Figures that predate Jesus
The Truth About Mythological Figures Similar To Jesus
Other Gods That Rose From the Dead in Spring Before Jesus Christ
Yeah, yeah, we all agree that the Bible and NT are man-made fiction. But then, what is the Baha'i Faith? Their claim is that all of the major religions were true, originally. But where's the evidence of any supposedly "true" original writings and teachings?
So, is the Baha'i Faith taking bits and pieces of the other religions, mostly Shia Islam, a creating a new religion? Or, did it really come from some divine being? Supposedly the same one the "revealed" all the other religions... that, of course, all contradict each other.
Oh, and spirit beings can communicate with you, but the great almighty God can't? If this God is real, I think he could. Again... he can communicate to his special manifestations. He can communicate to prophets. But ordinary humans? That's not something he can do or wants to do?
The person that started the thread is a Baha'i. There was a reason why he asked the question. He abandoned his own thread, which happens a lot with Baha'is. Usually, that's when TB takes over. And once she's involved, it is about the Baha'i Faith.First of all, this thread isn't about the Baha'i Faith. It is about Christianity. Secondly, I don't know enough about the Baha'i Faith to say one way or another, even if this thread were about it. The Baha'i Faith is @Trailblazer's expertise, not mine. Thirdly, I don't argue or debate with other people about my beliefs concerning the afterlife or my experiences with spirits as a psychic medium. For the record, I've provided plenty of information about what I believe and what my experiences with spirits are like in various threads, including my own, so the information is available to read. Lastly, I don't believe that I've had any form of communication directly from God during all the years that I believed in him (read here). And now I have serious doubts that he even exists.
It is not about the Bahai Faith because I make it about the Baha'i Faith. Once you become involved you make all the threads I start about the Baha'i Faith vs. other religions, even though that is not what I started those threads to discuss. You even make threads that Christians start about the Baha'i Faith vs. Christianity. You love to discuss the Baha'i Faith, but I don't mind because it is good for business, and you are a very knowledgeable non-Baha'i.He abandoned his own thread, which happens a lot with Baha'is. Usually, that's when TB takes over. And once she's involved, it is about the Baha'i Faith.
Yes, as we both know there is a plethora of evidence that many stories in the Bible were taken from older stories, such as Greek mythology. As I explained in another thread, replace the name Jesus with Attis (the Phrygian-Greek god of vegetation), and you'll have a strikingly familiar savior story similar to that of Jesus, except the Greek myths about Attis are dated 1250 BCE, which predates the Bible and Christianity (see here).
Furthermore, you could replace the name Jesus Christ with any of the other gods described in the following articles linked below, and you'll have more strikingly familiar stories that not only parallel the stories of his alleged crucifixion, death, and resurrection but also parallel other stories that have been written in the Bible about his supposed life on Earth. And, like the myths about Attis, these other stories about Christ-like figures from Greek mythology and other pagan religions predate both the Bible and Christianity. I recommend learning more about Jesus in comparative mythology.
But when we look at the stories of Attis around we see they are nothing like the story of Jesus.
Is Jesus an Updated Attis?
The purpose of this blog is to disprovethis latter claim by showing that there is no real parallel between theresurrection of Attis and the resurrection of Jesus. Because of his wound, Attis bled to death in the forest.Grief-stricken, Cybele is said to have brought Attis back to life. According…thedailyapologist.com
Attis, Cybele, and Jesus
Answering Bible contradictions, misunderstandings, and misinterpretationswww.tektonics.org
The whole idea of gods, demigods, having big things in common with Jesus is a big lie.
Richard Carrier does not use the BS stories about these gods that float around the internet. He is more subtle in his approach but still manages to say that these gods, which have nothing much in common with Jesus at all, are still sources for the story of Jesus.
You should go through each of the gods mentioned in Jesus plagiarization sites and see the real similarities, which are usually pretty minor if there at all.
The truth is that Jesus fulfills OT prophecy and that from what I have checked, these prophecies predate the god myths you cite, unless of course you say that most of the OT was written around the time of the Babylonian exile. You probably do say that and that may help preserve your fantasy about these Greek myths and Jesus, even though the stories are nothing like Jesus. (and btw, Jesus was not born on Dec 25).
After the OP, here's one of Loverofhumanity's posts.The person that started the thread is a Baha'i. There was a reason why he asked the question.
The point seems to be that he wanted to show that people in all religions believe for the same reasons. One of them being, "having a gut feeling" it is true. The question he asks is then if the Christian has a "gut" feeling and the person in another religion has a "gut" feeling, why do some Christians say that the person's in the other religions is wrong and that they are being deceived?No. But by the same token Christians often condemn people who believe in other religions by calling them ‘deceived’ when they have had the same personal subjective experience Christians have had about Jesus.
So it’s ok and valid for a Christian to have a personal experience about Jesus to justify their belief but not a Muslim or Hindu or Baha’i? These people are all accused of being deceived by Satan. I believe this to be bias, discrimination and prejudice.
Going by the basic beliefs and practices of Christianity or any of the other religions, all religions contradict each other. They all can't be true. Unless... there is a way to eliminate all those apparent differences and contradictions.But then, like here on this thread, there is you a Christian and Loverofhumanity a Baha'i. You both believe you have enough evidence that your beliefs are true, yet they contradict each other. Your evidence is such that you know that his evidence is false. The Jesus he believes in is not the same Jesus you believe in. And, if you are a Trinitarian Christian, the God you believe in is not the same God he believes in.
But, as the thread about religion being a placebo, does it matter? Both of you try to live by the things your religious beliefs tell you. If God is real, then I think it does matter. Is one of your religions true and the other false? Are both of them true? How can we know without more and better evidence?
If God spoke, appeared to people, sent angels, sent prophets etc, in the Bible, then God has ways to prove himself real. If he didn't, then the Bible is just a book of religious myth. If the Baha'is are right, and all we can know about God is from his manifestations, then what the Bible says about God and what he's done and can do is still fictional.
That is the Baha'i belief. Get rid of the belief that one person's religion is superior to another's. However, I think there is a lot of manipulation and reinterpreting and ignoring that has to go on to force religions to all be "one". But that is something that is necessary for the Baha'is to accomplish. They need the differences in all the other religions to be done away with and all the things they have in common to be brought to the forefront. Then the next step is... accepting that the Baha'i Faith is the next step in the progression of God's teachings. That Baha'u'llah is the prophet for this day and age.There are wonderful Christians who I deeply admire and respect. But isn’t it possible for a spiritual person with no religion or a Hindu, Buddhist or Muslim to all have found truth? Humanity is like a beautiful garden of different coloured flowers. Although we each are unique, we all get our warmth from the same sun and rain from the same sky. Yet we often oppose one another and treat each other as enemies just because we are different.
This is the age to get rid of once and for all the attitude that any race, religion or nationality is superior to another.
No, not at all. The Baha'is are not going to force the religions to become one and it is not something for Baha'is to accomplish. It is something that will unfold naturally over time, as religions choose to unite. We know that eventually it will come to fruition because it is what God has ordained. It will be accomplished through the power of Baha'u'llah's Revelation, not by the Baha'is.That is the Baha'i belief. Get rid of the belief that one person's religion is superior to another's. However, I think there is a lot of manipulation and reinterpreting and ignoring that has to go on to force religions to all be "one". But that is something that is necessary for the Baha'is to accomplish.
For certain Baha'is, all the threads they start are about the Baha'i Faith since they can think of nothing else.Anyway, that's why I think that from the beginning, this thread was about the Baha'i Faith.
Archaeology has shown there is no way the early Bible scriptures are anything but a foundation mythology.I believe the contrary is true. Archeology has confirmed many things from the bible. If there are differences that may be because the archeology has not caught up with the truth yet.
Yes I agree but you should be aware of crank amateur scholarship. The article based on Zeitgeist isn't a good source. That was based on D.M. Murdock's work and she was good but just not always correct. For the most accurate information stick to peer-reviewed works.Yes, as we both know there is a plethora of evidence that many stories in the Bible were taken from older stories, such as Greek mythology. As I explained in another thread, replace the name Jesus with Attis (the Phrygian-Greek god of vegetation), and you'll have a strikingly familiar savior story similar to that of Jesus, except the Greek myths about Attis are dated 1250 BCE, which predates the Bible and Christianity (see here). Furthermore, you could replace the name Jesus Christ with any of the other gods described in the following articles linked below, and you'll have more strikingly familiar stories that not only parallel the stories of his alleged crucifixion, death, and resurrection but also parallel other stories that have been written in the Bible about his supposed life on Earth. And, like the myths about Attis, these other stories about Christ-like figures from Greek mythology and other pagan religions predate both the Bible and Christianity. I recommend learning more about Jesus in comparative mythology. You can start here: Jesus in comparative mythology. In my opinion, these other accounts of Christlike figures demonstrate that paganism had a significant influence on the stories about Jesus and that Christianity's beliefs are not unique. I know that Christians like to claim that the Bible was divinely inspired by God and that Christianity is the only true religion, but I don't believe that is true based on the information provided in these articles and in other similar ones. Christianity, in my opinion, is a copycat religion.
10 Christ-Like Figures that predate Jesus
The Truth About Mythological Figures Similar To Jesus
Other Gods That Rose From the Dead in Spring Before Jesus Christ
All historians say the Bible was written after the exile. Doesn't matter because the first Gospel, the others copied from USED THE OT to create a narrative. Verbatim at times. The Kings narrative, Elija, Moses, Psalms verbatim, it isn't "fulfilled prophecy" it's a pt 2 now using Greek Hellenistic savior demigods for salvation. Mark was clever enough to make a metaphor with the Yom Kippur/Passover goat sacrifices with Jesus and Barabus. One set free, one dies for sin atonement. Excellent fiction using Greek salvation mythology.But when we look at the stories of Attis around we see they are nothing like the story of Jesus.
Is Jesus an Updated Attis?
The purpose of this blog is to disprovethis latter claim by showing that there is no real parallel between theresurrection of Attis and the resurrection of Jesus. Because of his wound, Attis bled to death in the forest.Grief-stricken, Cybele is said to have brought Attis back to life. According…thedailyapologist.com
Attis, Cybele, and Jesus
Answering Bible contradictions, misunderstandings, and misinterpretationswww.tektonics.org
The whole idea of gods, demigods, having big things in common with Jesus is a big lie.
Richard Carrier does not use the BS stories about these gods that float around the internet. He is more subtle in his approach but still manages to say that these gods, which have nothing much in common with Jesus at all, are still sources for the story of Jesus.
You should go through each of the gods mentioned in Jesus plagiarization sites and see the real similarities, which are usually pretty minor if there at all.
The truth is that Jesus fulfills OT prophecy and that from what I have checked, these prophecies predate the god myths you cite, unless of course you say that most of the OT was written around the time of the Babylonian exile. You probably do say that and that may help preserve your fantasy about these Greek myths and Jesus, even though the stories are nothing like Jesus. (and btw, Jesus was not born on Dec 25).
Carrier uses original sources only. Here is just one:The whole idea of gods, demigods, having big things in common with Jesus is a big lie.
Richard Carrier does not use the BS stories about these gods that float around the internet. He is more subtle in his approach but still manages to say that these gods, which have nothing much in common with Jesus at all, are still sources for the story of Jesus.
Just look at the entry on Hellenistic religion in Brit: it's exactly the NT narrative.The whole idea of gods, demigods, having big things in common with Jesus is a big lie.
Richard Carrier does not use the BS stories about these gods that float around the internet. He is more subtle in his approach but still manages to say that these gods, which have nothing much in common with Jesus at all, are still sources for the story of Jesus.
I believe that is false.Archaeology has shown there is no way the early Bible scriptures are anything but a foundation mythology.
From the 2nd Temple Period onwards the historical information is enough to show it's all borrowed mythology mixed with Jewish elements.
Archaeology has shown the Israelites came from Canaan, not Egypt.
Genesis is a re-working of older Mesopotamian creation/flood myths.
There was no conquest, just a peaceful move from Canaan.
For many centuries Yahweh was worshipped with a goddess.
Yahweh is a typical Near Eastern deity, similar Gods existed for thousands of years.
NOVA | The Bible's Buried Secrets | Archeology of the Hebrew Bible | PBS
In this article, archaeologist and biblical scholar William Dever discusses how archeology can offer vivid insights into the biblical world.www.pbs.orgPROVING THE BIBLE
Q: Have biblical archeologists traditionally tried to find evidence that events in the Bible really happened?
William Dever: From the beginnings of what we call biblical archeology, perhaps 150 years ago, scholars, mostly western scholars, have attempted to use archeological data to prove the Bible. And for a long time it was thought to work. [William Foxwell] Albright, the great father of our discipline, often spoke of the "archeological revolution." Well, the revolution has come but not in the way that Albright thought. The truth of the matter today is that archeology raises more questions about the historicity of the Hebrew Bible and even the New Testament than it provides answers, and that's very disturbing to some people.
Dever: We know today, from archeological investigation, that there were more than 300 early villages of the 13th and 12th century in the area. I call these "proto-Israelite" villages.
Forty years ago it would have been impossible to identify the earliest Israelites archeologically. We just didn't have the evidence. And then, in a series of regional surveys, Israeli archeologists in the 1970s began to find small hilltop villages in the central hill country north and south of Jerusalem and in lower Galilee. Now we have almost 300 of them.
THE ORIGINS OF ISRAEL
Q: What have archeologists learned from these settlements about the early Israelites? Are there signs that the Israelites came in conquest, taking over the land from Canaanites?
Dever: The settlements were founded not on the ruins of destroyed Canaanite towns but rather on bedrock or on virgin soil. There was no evidence of armed conflict in most of these sites. Archeologists also have discovered that most of the large Canaanite towns that were supposedly destroyed by invading Israelites were either not destroyed at all or destroyed by "Sea People"—Philistines, or others.
So gradually the old conquest model [based on the accounts of Joshua's conquests in the Bible] began to lose favor amongst scholars. Many scholars now think that most of the early Israelites were originally Canaanites, displaced Canaanites, displaced from the lowlands, from the river valleys, displaced geographically and then displaced ideologically.
So what we are dealing with is a movement of peoples but not an invasion of an armed corps from the outside. A social and economic revolution, if you will, rather than a military revolution. And it begins a slow process in which the Israelites distinguish themselves from their Canaanite ancestors, particularly in religion—with a new deity, new religious laws and customs, new ethnic markers, as we would call them today.
Some people believe the Earth is flat. Belief isn't truth, you need evidence.I believe that is false.