Talking Religion...

[Bleed S & G]

"26 While they were eating, Jesus took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and giving it to his disciples said, "Take and eat; this is my body." 27 Then he took a cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you, 28 for this is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed on behalf of many for the forgiveness of sins."

You can interpret them as you like.

Hate to be the bearer of bad news. Almost every religion that pre-dates Christianity, celebrates the Eucharist. The Greeks, Romans, Babylon, etc.

They all ate flesh in remembrance of their "son" God.

Jesus Christ - Son of God - was not God. He never claimed to be God.. he was a great sage, a great prophet, perhaps the greatest. He was not God.

The story of Jesus Christ also pre-dates Christianity. Infact, it may be the earliest story of all..

On December 21st - the "Sun" reaches it's lowest point in the sky.. the winter solstice.

It remains there for 3 days.. the "Sun of God" is "dead" for 3 days.

Ancient man is freaking out. Try and put yourself in early man's shoes..

You NEED sunlight.. it's safety, it's warm, crops, life, etc. You've been monitoring the days getting shorter, less and less light. All the sudden, the Sun stops moving in the sky.. the Sun is "dead."

During this 3 days pause in the sky.. the brightest constellation the Sun "hangs" next to is the Southern Crux or "Southern Cross."

On December 24th - the "Star in the East" or Sirius, lines up with the "3 Kings" or Orion's Belt, and points exactly to where the Sun will rise the next day, December 25th. Sirius is the brightest star in the sky at this time of the year.

On December 25th - the Sun begins to rise back up in the sky, signaling longer days and more light. "Light of the world." Where the sun rises, on the horizon is the star Virgo - the virgin birth of the Sun.

The Sun begins to live again on this day - or is "Resurrected."

Ancient man celebrates. Makes some sacrifices, eats some flesh.. drinks some blood.. you know.

Ancient Religions and the Sky tell the story of Jesus "Christ."

• The son of God hangs on the cross, and dies.
• The son is dead for 3 days, and rises from the dead.
• The son of God has a virgin birth of December 25th, with the star in the East and the 3 Kings marking where the birth will be.

Seriously, think about this.. think about how Religion, especially MODERN Christianity came about..

 

[JimsSweaterVest]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XFGrQMD6Uqc]YouTube - Welcome to Hell[/ame]

 

[Gatorubet]

Hate to be the bearer of bad news. Almost every religion that pre-dates Christianity, celebrates the Eucharist. The Greeks, Romans, Babylon, etc.

They all ate flesh in remembrance of their "son" God.

Jesus Christ - Son of God - was not God. He never claimed to be God.. he was a great sage, a great prophet, perhaps the greatest. He was not God.

The story of Jesus Christ also Prue-dates Christianity. In fact, it may be the earliest story of all..

On December 21st - the "Sun" reaches it's lowest point in the sky.. the winter solstice.

It remains there for 3 days.. the "Sun of God" is "dead" for 3 days.

Ancient man is freaking out. Try and put yourself in early man's shoes..

You NEED sunlight.. it's safety, it's warm, crops, life, etc. You've been monitoring the days getting shorter, less and less light. All the sudden, the Sun stops moving in the sky.. the Sun is "dead."

During this 3 days pause in the sky.. the brightest constellation the Sun "hangs" next to is the Southern Crux or "Southern Cross."

On December Th - the "Star in the East" or Sirius, lines up with the "3 Kings" or Orion's Belt, and points exactly to where the Sun will rise the next day, December Th. Sirius is the brightest star in the sky at this time of the year.

On December Th - the Sun begins to rise back up in the sky, signaling longer days and more light. "Light of the world." Where the sun rises, on the horizon is the star Virgo - the virgin birth of the Sun.

The Sun begins to live again on this day - or is "Resurrected."

Ancient man celebrates. Makes some sacrifices, eats some flesh.. drinks some blood.. you know.

Ancient Religions and the Sky tell the story of Jesus "Christ."

• The son of God hangs on the cross, and dies.
• The son is dead for 3 days, and rises from the dead.
• The son of God has a virgin birth of December Th, with the star in the East and the 3 Kings marking where the birth will be.

Seriously, think about this.. think about how Religion, especially MODERN Christianity came about..

You watched that video didn't you. :p

(the Bible says nothing about three Kings, but...)

While sacrifice is a common theme in ancient religions, to say that the Jews sat up one day and decided to get their southern cross and Son of God on is a bit simplistic. The themes are universal, although not all religions have a forgiveness of sins because of a son of God being a sacrifice on a cross.

The devouring of the sun and its rebirth is obviously a potent theme with early man. But creation of monotheism and the flavor that is Christianity deserves more credit, if you will, than just saying that "son" and "sun", which are only homonyms in English, come from each other, and are rip-off of other deities. The God of Abraham is not Sol, Helios, Apollo or Ra/Aten.

 

[Bleed S & G]

While sacrifice is a common theme in ancient religions, to say that the Jews sat up one day and decided to get their southern cross and Son of God on is a bit simplistic. The themes are universal, although not all religions have a forgiveness of sins because of a son of God being a sacrifice on a cross.

You're missing the point about the last partt I posted.. perhaps it's my mistake for not sharing my thoughts on the subject..

The devouring of the sun and its rebirth is obviously a potent theme with early man. But creation of monotheism and the flavor that is Christianity deserves more credit, if you will, than just saying that "son" and "sun", which are only homonyms in English, come from each other, and are rip-off of other deities. The God of Abraham is not Sol, Helios, Apollo or Ra/Aten.

It deserves MUCH more credit..

Where does the basis for every Christian religion come from? Well the Jews, obviously, but beyond the Jews - where does every type of Christian belief spring from?

The Holy Roman Catholic Church. (HRCC)

They've all split off from that Christian church. Some don't like idols in their places of worship, some think of the Eucharist as a symbolic event - but all branches of Christianity have come from the Tree that is the HRCC.

The root of this tree is the story of Jesus. Jesus walked around his part of the world and taught Love. Taught Forgiveness. Taught the scribes new ways to look at the Law of God. Gave us new commandments. Taught the mysteries of the Kingdom.

In Revelations, when speaking of the HRCC - or the Whore of Babylon - John for see's the problems of the HRCC:

1: And there came one of the seven angels which had the seven vials, and talked with me, saying unto me, Come hither; I will shew unto thee the judgment of the great whore that sitteth upon many waters:
2: With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.
3: So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns.
4: And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication:
5: And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.

I don't feel like arguing the finer details - and if we must, we can - but let's assume the HRCC is the Whore.

The Whore is the mother of all the Harlots. The kings have fornicated with her, and the people of the Earth are drunk from the wine of her fornications.

My translation:

The HRCC is split once.. twice.. three times and so on. Each time, the Church that splits off (Lutheran, Protestant, etc.) maintains the principles and beliefs that they agree with - but changes certain things they don't agree with.. making such a church, a Harlot.

It was NOT the Jews who got their "southern cross and Son of God on" .. it was the HRCC.

Early Christians held very different beliefs than Christians today hold.

How did the beliefs change, or get perverted..

Without diving back into Revelations - which describes the progression very poetically and correctly - the new faith of the Christians, a faith of peace and love - became the official Religion after this "god" helped them win a war.

How would you have an empire, who has been practicing to pagan gods - accept your new religion?

Combine them. Pervert them. Who gives a fuck anyways? It's not like they believed the crap - they just wanted POWER.

Make no mistake, there is not any institution more POWERFUL than the church in the history of the world.

The HRCC, and all of it's harlots.. are so FAR from what Jesus preached, taught, and lived.. it's not even funny.

 

[MaxBuck]

I'm not Catholic, so perhaps I'm missing something, but I don't think you're changing the wafer whatsoever. It's done in remembrance of him, to remember what he gave to you. ... They are different, but evolution has a long ways to go to be declared as "true", and currently relies on assumptions/faith as well.

Actually, Josh, Catholic theology teaches that the bread "becomes" the body of Christ and the wine his blood through "transubstantiation." An explanation of the phenomenon can be found at CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: The Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist.

Episcopal/Anglican theology agrees with the concept of transubstantiation. Contrast this with the concept of consubstantiation:
Consubstantiation - Theopedia

With respect to evolution, with respect I disagree that there is any faith component in accepting its fundamental truth (though as with all scientific theories it is subject to revision and refinement as knowledge increases - reference the Newtonian concept of gravity and Einstein's refinement of it).

 

[jwinslow]

Yeah my ignorance to that issue was removed shortly after that post, which led to some topics about eating flesh and ashes :p I see why they interpret it that way, but don't believe they are correct.

 

[JimsSweaterVest]

Yeah my ignorance to that issue was removed shortly after that post, which led to some topics about eating flesh and ashes :p I see why they interpret it that way, but don't believe they are correct.

Uh-oh, now you did it. You're in deep trouble! You're about to become "jwinslowned"!

 

[jwinslow]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSL4cmFW_GU]YouTube - Seinfeld - Man Hands[/ame]

 

[Gatorubet]

If I go to Purgatory and ever get my hands on that Martin Luther - well - let's just say
Mr. 95 Thesis will look more like 95 pieces of feces when I get through with him....

 

[DontHateOState]

[FONT=georgia, bookman old style, palatino linotype, book antiqua, palatino, trebuchet ms, helvetica, garamond, sans-serif, arial, verdana, avante garde, century gothic, comic sans ms, times, times new roman, serif]Alexander, Caesar, Charlemagne, and I have founded empires. But on what did we rest the creations of our genius? Upon force. Jesus Christ founded his empire upon love; and at this hour millions of men would die for him.

~Napoleon Bonaparte[/FONT]

 

[buckeyegrad]

Jesus Christ - Son of God - was not God. He never claimed to be God.. he was a great sage, a great prophet, perhaps the greatest. He was not God.

What is your interpretation of the following verses then?

Yet ye have not known him; but I know him: and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know him, and keep his saying. Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad. Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham? Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by. (John 8:55-59)

If Jesus was not declaring himself to be God by saying that he was "before Abraham" (who existed c. 1800 years before Jesus) and that he was "I am", then what exactly was he saying.

Seems to me that Jewish authorities fully understood him to be saying he was God, hence why they sought to cast stones at him.

Hate to be the bearer of bad news. Almost every religion that pre-dates Christianity, celebrates the Eucharist. The Greeks, Romans, Babylon, etc.

They all ate flesh in remembrance of their "son" God.


The story of Jesus Christ also pre-dates Christianity. Infact, it may be the earliest story of all..

On December 21st - the "Sun" reaches it's lowest point in the sky.. the winter solstice.

It remains there for 3 days.. the "Sun of God" is "dead" for 3 days.

Ancient man is freaking out. Try and put yourself in early man's shoes..

You NEED sunlight.. it's safety, it's warm, crops, life, etc. You've been monitoring the days getting shorter, less and less light. All the sudden, the Sun stops moving in the sky.. the Sun is "dead."

During this 3 days pause in the sky.. the brightest constellation the Sun "hangs" next to is the Southern Crux or "Southern Cross."

On December 24th - the "Star in the East" or Sirius, lines up with the "3 Kings" or Orion's Belt, and points exactly to where the Sun will rise the next day, December 25th. Sirius is the brightest star in the sky at this time of the year.

On December 25th - the Sun begins to rise back up in the sky, signaling longer days and more light. "Light of the world." Where the sun rises, on the horizon is the star Virgo - the virgin birth of the Sun.

The Sun begins to live again on this day - or is "Resurrected."

Ancient man celebrates. Makes some sacrifices, eats some flesh.. drinks some blood.. you know.

Ancient Religions and the Sky tell the story of Jesus "Christ."

• The son of God hangs on the cross, and dies.
• The son is dead for 3 days, and rises from the dead.
• The son of God has a virgin birth of December 25th, with the star in the East and the 3 Kings marking where the birth will be.

Seriously, think about this.. think about how Religion, especially MODERN Christianity came about..

Do you realize how laughable these claims are to legitimate scholars, both secular and religious, in the fields of Biblical scholarship and Christian history. Most of these ideas are based on theories proposed in the laste 1800s, and were primarily dismissed two generations ago. A perfect example of this would the idea that Christianity adopted many of its beliefs from the worship of Mithras. There is not one serious, legitimate scholar on Mithras who accepts this theory as legitimate today.

Did 3rd and 4th century Christians merge the original teachings of Jesus and his disciples (i.e. Peter, John, James, Paul, etc) with pagan beliefs. Of course they did--thus Christmas and Easter, Sunday worship, and the outright rejection of Torah. Does this mean every belief of modern Christianity is the result of such a mixing of traditions, of course not. Such a conclusion would only result from lazy thinking. If we go back to the writings we have from the first century and re-read them fresh without the last 1700+ years of theology clouding the reading, we still find many, just not all, of the beliefs of modern Christianity present.

 

[buckeyegrad]

While we anxiously endure the long wait until football starts again, I thought I'd make a thread to put up questions and thoughts on religion, since it is a topic that interests me. Some of my ideas may be unorthodox, but my intent is not to offend. I just like having good arguments and being challenged to think.

Mods, if this thread is out of place, please tell me and I will move it to the right board. Thanks.

1. The neuroscientist Sam Harris said in a Caltech lecture, and I'm paraphrasing here: "If you believe that saying a few lines in Latin over your breakfast cereal transforms your Lucky Charms into the body of Julius Ceasar, everyone will think you're crazy. But if you believe doing the same over a wafer on Sunday turns it into the body of Jesus, you're almost certainly completely sane and intelligent, but almost certainly Catholic."

Is there a cognitive dissonance here? How does one choose to believe one proposition but ridicule the other?

I myself was raised Catholic, and I'm still trying to answer this one for myself.

About a month ago I read an article that I believe really got to the heart of what religion is. The article contended that the central essence of religion is soteriological, meaning that it addresses the question of salvation. As humans we recognize that there is something that threatens us individually and collectively. Thus, there is a great concern by each individual to want to escape that threat. Of course, each individual, society, and culture will define this threat differently, and thus we have different religions.

Working from this starting point, what becomes transcendent and the "religious experience" for an individual is the process of escaping the threat. Furthermore, "god" is the agent that facilitates escape to safety and/or the complete achievement of transcending the threat.

I believe this accounts for the so-called "dissonance" that you ask about here. What may seem illogical in one context is completely reasonable in another depending upon how one views what the threat to us is and how one escapes that threat.

 

[Bleed S & G]

What is your interpretation of the following verses then?

Yet ye have not known him; but I know him: and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know him, and keep his saying. Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad. Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham? Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by. (John 8:55-59)

My interpretation is that Jesus was speaking of something none of us here have any idea about.

I can pull many verses out - where Jesus won't answer the question of him being God, instead he responds "it is you who has said it." He also uses this same line with healing and miracles. "It is your faith that has healed you."

I stand by Jesus being the greatest sage this planet has ever known - and he defiantly had a spirit manifest in him (see baptism, when the heavens opened before him), was in contact with, or knew forces outside of this plane.

I don't think he was born of a virgin as "god." There are too many sun gods, that had the same qualities of Jesus for this to make sense to me.

Virgin birth. Hung on a cross. Resurrected after 3 days. Had 12 followers. Walked on water. "lamb of lambs" & "light of the world", healed by laying hands on someone. Baptised. Started ministry around 30. No stories between 12 years old and 30.

These qualities above were present in almost every sun god before Jesus walked this planet.

Doesn't make sense to me.. does this make me a "lazy" thinker? 1.) I find that accusation rather harsh considering you have no idea how I came about this thinking and 2.) you have no idea how it fits into everything else my lazy thinking has put together. It would be an entire book if I were to try and write it down.

Do you realize how laughable these claims are to legitimate scholars, both secular and religious, in the fields of Biblical scholarship and Christian history. Most of these ideas are based on theories proposed in the laste 1800s, and were primarily dismissed two generations ago. A perfect example of this would the idea that Christianity adopted many of its beliefs from the worship of Mithras. There is not one serious, legitimate scholar on Mithras who accepts this theory as legitimate today.

Please, enlighten me to who all these legitimate scholars are.

Seriously, if you're going to claim this - list all of them and I would like to read through their thoughts and theories. I enjoy learning and researching this stuff.

Does this mean every belief of modern Christianity is the result of such a mixing of traditions, of course not. Such a conclusion would only result from lazy thinking.

When did I make this conclusion?

Perhaps I wasn't clear..

The CORE of Catholicism is pagan.

Eucharist, Virgin birth, Idols, Rosary, Christmas, Easter.. the list goes on.

Modern Christianity comes from the Catholic church. As in, they split off from the Catholics and kept traditions and practices.

Are their traditions kept from the early Christians, of course. Again, they merged Christianity and pagan practices. That means, they have elements of both in them.

How can you conceede that they did merge belifs, and then imply I'm saying: nothing in modern christianity is the same as the early Christians practiced it? Lazy thinking?

Perhaps I'm not wording this very well.. let me know - I like the debate, and do get a list of scholars so I can dive more into this.

 

[BayBuck]

Metaphors are perfectly fine tools in language to convey an idea. What they're not, however, is "literal." At some point, in your "literal" translation of the Bible you have to decide "Was that a metaphor?" Now, I'm not saying they are difficult to spot, necessarily.... but.. what if you make a mistake? Seems to me, if we are to credit the idea of damnation, the consequences could be quite severe. Considering the stakes, it begs the question - why not just come out and say it directly? "You want in to heaven? Then you'd better do what I say!"

Science, for example - it says "an object at rest stays at rest unless it is acted upon by some other force" It does not say "Objects at rest are as a lazy man who has no desire but one, who when this interest is peaked begins to act and move but not before"

Both remarks, the basic and the metaphoric, tell us something about the law of motion... one is a lot more clear than the other.

What you are doing here is purposely limiting the scope and adaptibility of language to suit your argument against the consistency of the Bible, but you are quite wrong in saying that metaphor is by definition not literal. I provided you with two applicable definitions of the word "gate", one more physically literal and the other more metaphysical, but both are quite literal readings of the word, as is any widely accepted/used sense of a word. Does the possibility of multiple meanings open the door (there's another metaphor that can be read literally without having to reference a physical hinged object) to misreadings or competing interpretations? Of course. But by insisting on a too-literal reading you are intentionally stripping away the clear and intended message according to your own bias.

 

[buckeyegrad]

My interpretation is that Jesus was speaking of something none of us here have any idea about.

Except the title "I AM" has a very specific meaning in Judaism that all around him would have understood. Thus the response to stone him. If he had simply said something that no one had any clue about, why the reaction by the Jews who heard him?

I can pull many verses out - where Jesus won't answer the question of him being God, instead he responds "it is you who has said it." He also uses this same line with healing and miracles. "It is your faith that has healed you."

Being question about being God or about being messiah? I'm not sure I remember anyone asking him if he was God.

I stand by Jesus being the greatest sage this planet has ever known - and he defiantly had a spirit manifest in him (see baptism, when the heavens opened before him), was in contact with, or knew forces outside of this plane.

I don't think he was born of a virgin as "god." There are too many sun gods, that had the same qualities of Jesus for this to make sense to me.

Virgin birth. Hung on a cross. Resurrected after 3 days. Had 12 followers. Walked on water. "lamb of lambs" & "light of the world", healed by laying hands on someone. Baptised. Started ministry around 30. No stories between 12 years old and 30.

These qualities above were present in almost every sun god before Jesus walked this planet.

Doesn't make sense to me.. does this make me a "lazy" thinker? 1.) I find that accusation rather harsh considering you have no idea how I came about this thinking and 2.) you have no idea how it fits into everything else my lazy thinking has put together. It would be an entire book if I were to try and write it down.

Please, enlighten me to who all these legitimate scholars are.

Seriously, if you're going to claim this - list all of them and I would like to read through their thoughts and theories. I enjoy learning and researching this stuff.

A good place to start would be Chapter 4 of Lee Strobel's book, The Case for the Real Jesus. In this chapter he interviews Dr. Edwin Yamauchi, professor of history at Miami University and one of the world's leading scholars on the cult of Mithras on the very issue of the story of Jesus in the Gospels compared to the story of other gods.

Another good place via the web is Tekton, which has a hub page addressing the issue http://www.tektonics.org/copycat/copycathub.html

As for the "lazy thinking" comment, that is directed at the idea that just because two things share a similar trait, then one must have borrowed from the other. From the perspective of doing history, this is very faulty reasoning unless archeological or historical writings can demonstrate such connections.

Essentially, what the historical evidence indicates is that the stories of pagan gods that share traits with the story of Jesus all date to after the rise of Christianity and its first century writings. While the cults of Mithras, Adonis, Osiris all pre-date Christianity, the inclusion of similar traits to Jesus in these cults occur after they come into contact with Christianity.