Its Good news .

[John1.12]

One of the members of a forum that was big for awhile Personal Development for Smart People suddenly had daily messages from Jesus. Updates. People claim to have communication with divinity all the time and are always telling tall tales.
The actual answer is use critical thinking and skepticism. Incredible claims require incredible evidence.
People claim to speak regularly with divinity (first no divinity has been demonstrated to be real, that's one problem) and all they get from it are ridiculous myths that oddly enough sound like the same myths from other cultures (Christianity, Judaism, Islam) or are a big bunch of new BS (Scientology...).
Smith was a con artist. No one ever found his golden plates. The rhetoric he came away with about Indians being white people who sinned and so forth. If you cannot figure out it's a bunch of BS then you just don't care about what is true.
There is zero evidence that "Gods" speak to people in their minds. This is another trope of mythology. The claims do not stand up to careful investigation.
This should not be hard for you because you likely do not think Prince Ardjuna was actually spoken to by Lord Krishna in the Gita. Or really think the angel Gabrielle spoke new laws of Christianity to Mohammud. Because you would convert to Islam.
So you already know it's mostly BS.
You are just making a special allowance for your religion because you want to continue believing it.

The same goes for Abraham. The consensus in scholarship is that primary first author was more interested in creating myths for the new emerging culture, clearly drew from existing myths from Mesopotamia and gave the culture something to latch onto. There was no Yahweh speaking to Moses and Abraham. Those are stories that unite people. Yahweh became a national God in a larger pantheon, each nation having a supreme God of the nation.
The switch to Yahweh-centric only happened way later in 600-300BC when the high priests began questioning why was Yahweh allowing all these nations to continue to invade? The answer was monotheism (the Persians were also doing it). Didn't work, the Greeks invaded then the Romans.

In my worldview I can understand how potentially people have 'opened 'themselves to 'spirits 'who come in various pretences various guises . The bible warns of this. Most people are deceived by such experiences. To the ' outside ' yes they look crazy . Some may indeed be lying..The point is , i believe some are genuine.

 

[halbhh]

Besides they are ad-hoc desperate apologetics

Who's being desperate here?.... I couldn't help but notice you seem a bit exercised.

Perhaps later you can reflect on that and ask yourself what you were trying to cancel/prevent yourself hearing.

 

[joelr]

In my worldview I can understand how potentially people have 'opened 'themselves to 'spirits 'who come in various pretences various guises . The bible warns of this. Most people are deceived by such experiences. To the ' outside ' yes they look crazy . Some may indeed be lying..The point is , i believe some are genuine.

Yes you believe some are genuine. And some people actually truly believe they are having a relationship with the demigod Lord Krishna.
Jehova's Witness truly believe you are inthe wrong version of Christianity and are going to hell.

What people believe does not have any relationship to what is true. What matters is the evidence. Regarding spirits communicating with people under any pretense, there is literally zero evidence. No spirit has ever told a person something they couldn't have simply been making up from their mind.
The angel didn't say to Smith "Hitler is coming, Mt Saint Helens will erupt in 1984, the interenet will allow Mormons to communicate around the world in 100 years.
No, instead he got a bunch of mythology that sounds extremely suspiciously like made up bad sci-fi.
No psychic ever predicted 9/11 or the internet. Cold readers are using a specific known skill, it's all fake. There is no evidence of anything supernatural. Religions follow predictable religious tropes and borrowed myths. Again, no reason to think that was actually communication from a divinity. And there is no evidence of any divinity to communicate.

The OT is not considered messages from God among scholars. Yes Theologians cannot allow themselves to see these truths and use psuedo-scientific apologetics to fool themselves.

Again, a recent paper I read, not history, drew from earlier myths and legends.


Religion Identity and the Origins of Ancient Israel

K.L. Sparks (ordained Baptist Pastor, PhD in Hebrew Bible/Ancient Near East)


As a rule, modern scholars do not believe that the Bible's account of early Israel's history provides a wholly accurate portrait of Israel's origins. One reason for this is that the earliest part of Israel's history in Genesis is now regarded as something other than a work of modern history. It's primary author was at best an ancient historian (if a historian at all), who lived long after the events he narrated, and who drew freely from all sources that were not historical (legends and theological stories); he was more concerned with theology than with the modern quest to learn "what actually happened" (Van Seters 1992; Sparks 2002, pp 37-71; Maidman 2003).

As a result, the stories about Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph are better understood as windows into Israelite history than as portraits of Israel's early history. Almost as problematic as an historical source is the book of Exodus. This book tells the story of Israel's long enslavement in Egypt and of it's eventual emancipation; it also narrates the first stages of Israel's migration from Egypt toward Palestine. The trouble with this story, historically speaking, is that the Egyptians seem to have known nothing of these great events in which thousands of Israelite slaves were released from Egypt because of a series of natural (or supernatural( catastrophes - supposedly including the death of every firstborn Egyptian man and beast.

 

[joelr]

Who's being desperate here?.... I couldn't help but notice you seem a bit exercised.

Deaperate, no. The historicity dismantles your religion and easily demonstrates they are myths down to the last line. Will you listen, probably not. But no call for desperation.

Perhaps later you can reflect on that and ask yourself what you were trying to cancel/prevent yourself hearing.

I don't need to reflect. I detest normal intelligent people bending over backwards to make excuses for immoral passages in a book.
You haven't demonstrated any god or heaven is real yet are about to say "it's ok that Yahweh said to kill every living being in 6 cities when attacking them because they will end up in heaven".
First off, under religious doctrine is that even true? Would non-believers go to that heaven.
But the when the Deuteronic laws were written there was no heaven for individual people? As I pointed out that is a Hellenistic belief that was added to Judaism way later?

Now maybe you should reflect on the fact that there are immoral laws in the OT, that for many centuries followers of Yahweh were never told about heaven or about a soul that belongs there until they were invaded by a culture that did have those beliefs.
Same for messiahs (virgin born), apoctalyptic ending of the world and everyone resurrects and God and Satan are in an epic war. Those were Persian myths first. Christianity is a syncretic blend of older Middle Eastern myths found only in the Middle East.
No culture far away ever divined a mystery/pagan religion. It was a trend.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

The' Gospel ' literally means 'good news ' .This is described in a nut shell in 1 cor .15 .1-4

1¶Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;

2By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.

3¶For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;

4And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

Often Christianity is argued against for various reasons ,but negatively .the central message is actually 'good news ' literally.
Good news for the whole world. The message of how Jesus has died for our sins . Its 'good news '. Why do some treat it as bad news . Its a free gift also . You cannot earn it . Its the offer of eternal life.
So it's:
- eternal life ,
- forgiveness of sins ,completely ,past present and future .
- Peace with God
- Justification
- redemption
- Blessed with all spiritual blessings
- Its all a free gift
- cannot be earned
- recieved through faith
- No rituals,pilgrimage, special clothes ,bno joining an organisation , club , ' church ' no practices, no asceticism , to recieve all of the above .
Even if you argue that its not true, I don't believe its sensible to argue that the message ( Gospel ) is negative, or bad news ,if it is indeed true . Which of course I believe it is .
Thoughts?

The gospel has never been good news for Jews. It resulted in 2000 years of persecution, murder, and forced conversions.

 

[metis]

The gospel has never been good news for Jews. It resulted in 2000 years of persecution, murder, and forced conversions.

Fortunately, much of that has changed within probably most mainline Protestant denominations and the Catholic Church as well. Matter of fact, when I was in Poland studying the Holocaust back in 1991, I went to a meeting with a priest who was ordered by Pope John-Paul II to gain data on anti-Semitism in Poland and to report it directly to the Pope. When that same priest came to the Detroit area at a local synagogue, I went to that as well. I even got interviewed by the Detroit Jewish News, believe it or not.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Fortunately, much of that has changed within probably most mainline Protestant denominations and the Catholic Church as well. Matter of fact, when I was in Poland studying the Holocaust back in 1991, I went to a meeting with a priest who was ordered by Pope John-Paul II to gain data on anti-Semitism in Poland and to report it directly to the Pope. When that same priest came to the Detroit area at a local synagogue, I went to that as well. I even got interviewed by the Detroit Jewish News, believe it or not.

I agree with you.

 

[Starlight]

The gospel has never been good news for Jews. It resulted in 2000 years of persecution, murder, and forced conversions.

Its terrible this happened

 

[Truthseeker]

The gospel has never been good news for Jews. It resulted in 2000 years of persecution, murder, and forced conversions.

In my opinion, this was not the fault of Christ, but of the Christians that professed to follow Him.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

In my opinion, this was not the fault of Christ, but of the Christians that professed to follow Him.

It's all the same to us.

 

[halbhh]

The gospel has never been good news for Jews. It resulted in 2000 years of persecution, murder, and forced conversions.

I wonder if you agree that evil is a common human tendency? (if you count every kind, including the modern stuff like taking advantage of other people, at their expense, or returning insult for insult, or other common modern ills)

But, regardless, one thing to observe, even if you think only some are evil....

If all evil actions can be laid at the feet of entire groups when some evil is done in the name of the group, then America itself (as for most nations) would then be notably, remarkably evil, by that standard. Right? Because some have in fact claimed to do the great evils they did for America.

Or, as I see it, tried to make themselves seem justified or more legitimate by wrapping themselves in the flag....

A pretense, or even a delusion, but so common.

If in contrast instead we ask 'what is the general tendency averaged over time for America', then the answer is much more mixed, and America is no longer some simply evil nation.

But flawed, or mixed. Doing both goods and evils. Yes?

So, I think the way to judge a philosophy or religion isn't by what some do in it's name, akin to wrapping themselves in the banner/flag of it, but instead, by the principles of the philosophy and by the general tendency averaged over time of those that are actually trying to do as the principles of the religion/philosophy state.

So, not the tyrants that act in its name, but instead the more typical actions of those that actually believe in the principles and do them, over time -- the true believers -- (not just over 1 time period, but over all the time periods together).

Here's a good analogy in Judaism:

While most of the kings of Israel and Judah did evil we read, should we conclude that Israel is then evil?

Answer: No. We cannot judge Israel by what most of it's kings did.

Instead, we should look to see what those that truly believed (in the prophets) did.

While it will not rise to modern standards of the more evolved civilization we have now, how did the actions of the true believers compare to their own contemporaneous times?
-------

Finally, about the 'Christians' (or who used the banner) who murdered Jews, they will meet this fate:

Justice: Romans 2:6 God "will repay each one according to his deeds."

They will pay for their evils they did not utterly and totally repent (denounce and cease) of doing. So we read in the new testament.