• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Christian deceptions: Was Mary really a Virgin?

Psalm23

Alfrescian
Loyal
Both. The story of Jesus was based on both Horus, and Mithra (there were civilisations existing on earth, and believing in their gods before Abraham was spoken to by your God!

http://www.truthbeknown.com/mithra.htm

http://www.tomharpur.com/books/paganchrist/

Tom Harpur's "The Pagan Christ" explores the origins of the story of Jesus - in detail. His book cleared the path for many believers, who had been confused by the biblical stories, and they just couldn't accept them. Tom Harpur himself was a clergyman, an Anglican priest, who faced the questions asked by so many in society, that he himself went searching for historical evidence, and concluded that Jesus never existed. The story was man-made. I will not attempt to talk you (or anybody) out of your belief - it is your right, so be it. Just that I cannot accept those things happened as described by the bible.

Of course things outside of logic can occur - if one believes in magic! In this case, your God is a magician. I do not have the answers to all the questions, but I can live with that - that our species still is searching and investigating. We learn more each day. And get wiser, more exposed. We do not wish to depend on an invisible "force" that draws lines and says what is right and wrong for us. If we make mistakes, so let us learn from those mistakes. And not have some authority telling us how we should behave. There may have been a God, but he left. We're on our own.

Cheers!

"There may have been a God, but he left. We're on our own."

This is quite truth (actually only half-true) and hence I would humbly like to re-edit as follows: There have been a God, but He left because we kick Him out. We are now on our own."

Biblically speaking, this was what happened in the Garden of Eden. We want to be our own. We want to take full charge. And to do this, we have to kick God out. So, we all have live without God for last 6,000 years and we tried to prove that we can be on our own but we ended up with disastrous results. Look around us. Everything from new technological innovations to fighting for equality, just about everything is that we are witnessing daily is bring chaos to the world and often right into your home. You now have lost your rights to say that married should ONLY between a man and a woman. Try saying this in most western countries. You will be 'cut' to pieces, not physically though. It is very sad that if you have a daughter and one day she came back home and said to you: Daddy / Mummy, I am pregnant and I don't know who is the father of the baby.

And it will be equally sad that if you have a son and one day he came back home said Daddy / Mummy, I am getting married. May I introduce my wife (husband?) to you. This is Johnson. Isn't he handsome (beautiful?)

6,000 years is enough, and enough is enough. The final chapter of humanity is going to end and God is going to take control of everything, whether you like it or not, after all He created all things and He has every right to all the possessions, including your lives! (So, sad for many non-Christians but for Christians, we are looking forward to this day which can come at any time).

Come to God, come to Jesus and let Him take control of you. You can never be on own because you are God's creation.

God Bless.

Psalm23
 

Frodo

Alfrescian
Loyal
Both. The story of Jesus was based on both Horus, and Mithra (there were civilisations existing on earth, and believing in their gods before Abraham was spoken to by your God!

http://www.truthbeknown.com/mithra.htm

http://www.tomharpur.com/books/paganchrist/

Tom Harpur's "The Pagan Christ" explores the origins of the story of Jesus - in detail. His book cleared the path for many believers, who had been confused by the biblical stories, and they just couldn't accept them. Tom Harpur himself was a clergyman, an Anglican priest, who faced the questions asked by so many in society, that he himself went searching for historical evidence, and concluded that Jesus never existed. The story was man-made. I will not attempt to talk you (or anybody) out of your belief - it is your right, so be it. Just that I cannot accept those things happened as described by the bible.

Of course things outside of logic can occur - if one believes in magic! In this case, your God is a magician. I do not have the answers to all the questions, but I can live with that - that our species still is searching and investigating. We learn more each day. And get wiser, more exposed. We do not wish to depend on an invisible "force" that draws lines and says what is right and wrong for us. If we make mistakes, so let us learn from those mistakes. And not have some authority telling us how we should behave. There may have been a God, but he left. We're on our own.

Cheers!

Say both is win liao lor! Might as well say it is copied from ALL other religions! LOL!

People who don’t like Christianity will always find means and ways to discredit the faith. But can they make up their minds? Nope. So the strategy they employ is to fling as much m&d as possible hoping that some would stick. LOL! First they try to deny He existed. That proved futile. Never mind, then they try to cut away the historical Christ from the theological Christ. That was laughable. Next, they try to explain it away as a copycat religion from a composite of all religious figures before Christ. It just gets better and better! Hahahaha! But it also shows how desperate these atheists are, willing to cook up so many CSBs in order to deny and suppress the truth. The below links will demolish these nonsensical claims. You can choose to ignore them so as to retain your current antagonism towards Christianity.

http://www.tektonics.org/harpur01.html
http://www.face2face.org.za/articles/is-christianity-a-copycat-religion/
http://beginningandend.com/jesus-copy-horus-mithras-dionysis-pagan-gods/

Nothing in Christianity occurs outside logic, since God is the grounds of logic. You say we believe in magic, no, we believe in God. Atheists however, believe in magic because they believe the universe made itself, and life just came from nonliving matter. So you are actually guilty, if not more so, of the thing you accuse us of.
 

Agoraphobic

Alfrescian
Loyal
Thanks for your kind words. I like jesus, and I like the bible. Just that, I am unable to say they are accurate - based on reasoning. In the past, God(s) intervened with earthly issue, came down to earth, had affairs with human women, and interacted with society. Most historical societies had stories of such kind. But as time progressed, their visitations became less and less. Because we kicked them out, or they left us, whatever it is, it happened. And we're on our own. The only visitors we may get from the skies may be alien ETs (if it is worth their while).

However, the final chapter isn't going to turn out like some apocalyptic battle of Armageddon, depicted in the bible. There isn't going to be a final chapter for humanity. We are too resilient. Even if the planet were hit by a barrage of meteorites, there will be some people who will escape destruction, and survive. Not gloriously, but more like by the skin of their teeth. And lived in some cave, or escape via some spacecraft. Our species has the intelligence and ability to survive. Whatever it takes, whether through competition, or cooperation, we will.

Cheers!



"There may have been a God, but he left. We're on our own."

This is quite truth (actually only half-true) and hence I would humbly like to re-edit as follows: There have been a God, but He left because we kick Him out. We are now on our own."

Biblically speaking, this was what happened in the Garden of Eden. We want to be our own. We want to take full charge. And to do this, we have to kick God out. So, we all have live without God for last 6,000 years and we tried to prove that we can be on our own but we ended up with disastrous results. Look around us. Everything from new technological innovations to fighting for equality, just about everything is that we are witnessing daily is bring chaos to the world and often right into your home. You now have lost your rights to say that married should ONLY between a man and a woman. Try saying this in most western countries. You will be 'cut' to pieces, not physically though. It is very sad that if you have a daughter and one day she came back home and said to you: Daddy / Mummy, I am pregnant and I don't know who is the father of the baby.

And it will be equally sad that if you have a son and one day he came back home said Daddy / Mummy, I am getting married. May I introduce my wife (husband?) to you. This is Johnson. Isn't he handsome (beautiful?)

6,000 years is enough, and enough is enough. The final chapter of humanity is going to end and God is going to take control of everything, whether you like it or not, after all He created all things and He has every right to all the possessions, including your lives! (So, sad for many non-Christians but for Christians, we are looking forward to this day which can come at any time).

Come to God, come to Jesus and let Him take control of you. You can never be on own because you are God's creation.

God Bless.

Psalm23
 

Agoraphobic

Alfrescian
Loyal
The story of Jesus, though ancient by our times, were modern, and contemporary at the time it was written. Governments, institutions, were already established and historical records were kept. There were even museums and universities (during ancient Egypt). These were collections of knowledge. So when the stories of the bible were written, they were well discussed, researched and analysed before print. All the rough edges were smoothened, and what we have was a carefully crafted story well suited for society to accept - at the time when public resentment against Roman oppression was in need. Then came the story of the Messiah to fill that void! Shortly before the Church of Rome was instituted, there were different groups of Chirstians, (loosely held pockets of rebels against Rome actually) who looked to the persona of Jesus of Nazareth as their central figure. So Rome did the smart thing - gather them to meet at a place called Nicea, and get them to agree on certain things so they are unified in their ways. From this, they all agreed that Jesus Christ was born on 25th December, which coincides with the Roman celebration of Saturnalia - hence Christmas Day was st(s) arted! (for the Western Church). Rome adopted Christianity to be it official religion - to deal with the growing rebellions the Christians were creating and their refusal to pay their taxes! Christianity as the official relgion stemmed out the rebellion! The divine story of Jesus was based on these earlier stories of Gods on earth by earlier civilisations, and well accepted by societies then. Modifying them with the character of Jesus slotted in suited the plans of the early scribes to make their messiah. I didn't come up with this, it is what the author of the Pagan Christ described, after years and years of academic and theological studies.

Cheers!

Say both is win liao lor! Might as well say it is copied from ALL other religions! LOL!

People who don’t like Christianity will always find means and ways to discredit the faith. But can they make up their minds? Nope. So the strategy they employ is to fling as much m&d as possible hoping that some would stick. LOL! First they try to deny He existed. That proved futile. Never mind, then they try to cut away the historical Christ from the theological Christ. That was laughable. Next, they try to explain it away as a copycat religion from a composite of all religious figures before Christ. It just gets better and better! Hahahaha! But it also shows how desperate these atheists are, willing to cook up so many CSBs in order to deny and suppress the truth. The below links will demolish these nonsensical claims. You can choose to ignore them so as to retain your current antagonism towards Christianity.

http://www.tektonics.org/harpur01.html
http://www.face2face.org.za/articles/is-christianity-a-copycat-religion/
http://beginningandend.com/jesus-copy-horus-mithras-dionysis-pagan-gods/

Nothing in Christianity occurs outside logic, since God is the grounds of logic. You say we believe in magic, no, we believe in God. Atheists however, believe in magic because they believe the universe made itself, and life just came from nonliving matter. So you are actually guilty, if not more so, of the thing you accuse us of.
 

Frodo

Alfrescian
Loyal
The story of Jesus, though ancient by our times, were modern, and contemporary at the time it was written. Governments, institutions, were already established and historical records were kept. There were even museums and universities (during ancient Egypt). These were collections of knowledge. So when the stories of the bible were written, they were well discussed, researched and analysed before print. All the rough edges were smoothened, and what we have was a carefully crafted story well suited for society to accept - at the time when public resentment against Roman oppression was in need. Then came the story of the Messiah to fill that void! Shortly before the Church of Rome was instituted, there were different groups of Chirstians, (loosely held pockets of rebels against Rome actually) who looked to the persona of Jesus of Nazareth as their central figure. So Rome did the smart thing - gather them to meet at a place called Nicea, and get them to agree on certain things so they are unified in their ways. From this, they all agreed that Jesus Christ was born on 25th December, which coincides with the Roman celebration of Saturnalia - hence Christmas Day was st(s) arted! (for the Western Church). Rome adopted Christianity to be it official religion - to deal with the growing rebellions the Christians were creating and their refusal to pay their taxes! Christianity as the official relgion stemmed out the rebellion! The divine story of Jesus was based on these earlier stories of Gods on earth by earlier civilisations, and well accepted by societies then. Modifying them with the character of Jesus slotted in suited the plans of the early scribes to make their messiah. I didn't come up with this, it is what the author of the Pagan Christ described, after years and years of academic and theological studies.

Cheers!

So you uncritically accepted as Gospel truth what Tom Harpur wrote in the Pagan Christ? Did you employ those reasoning and logical skills on this book with the same rigor that you used on Christianity? How did you go about critically evaluating the claims made in The Pagan Christ? What criteria did you use? I have come across many people whose sole criteria was “so long as it is against Christianity I will take it as true and accept it.” You said Tom Harpur spend years in studies. Well, so did many others that came away with a different view than him. Did you read their works? Or you conveniently ignore them because they are not what you want to believe in anyway? In short, how objective are you?

Just to add, an entire book has been written to address Tom's book titled "Unmasking the Pagan Christ". You should check it up if you are really objective. Another link below

http://www.mcmaster.ca/mjtm/pdfs/MJTM 6.7 Heath on Harpur.pdf
 
Last edited:

Psalm23

Alfrescian
Loyal
Thanks for your kind words. I like jesus, and I like the bible. Just that, I am unable to say they are accurate - based on reasoning. In the past, God(s) intervened with earthly issue, came down to earth, had affairs with human women, and interacted with society. Most historical societies had stories of such kind. But as time progressed, their visitations became less and less. Because we kicked them out, or they left us, whatever it is, it happened. And we're on our own. The only visitors we may get from the skies may be alien ETs (if it is worth their while).

However, the final chapter isn't going to turn out like some apocalyptic battle of Armageddon, depicted in the bible. There isn't going to be a final chapter for humanity. We are too resilient. Even if the planet were hit by a barrage of meteorites, there will be some people who will escape destruction, and survive. Not gloriously, but more like by the skin of their teeth. And lived in some cave, or escape via some spacecraft. Our species has the intelligence and ability to survive. Whatever it takes, whether through competition, or cooperation, we will.

Cheers!


Interesting quote: Because we kicked them out, or they left us, whatever it is, it happened. And we're on our own. The only visitors we may get from the skies may be alien ETs (if it is worth their while).

Do you know why they are only visitors? In fact, they don't need to visit us anymore. These demons have imparted all their evil and demonic knowledge to mankind and because of this, human beings are now living like demons. Many of us are just like these demons and hence there is no motivation for them to visit us and to impart anymore of their evil and demonic knowledge. These demons might be wondering like: You know, these human beings are even better than us in doing those evil things; we have not taught them but how come they know how to do them!

Whether you agree or not, we are living really in a evil and demonic world! Read the newspapers, go to Youtube, Google internet, you can easily conclude this for yourself.

God Bless
Psalm23
 

Agoraphobic

Alfrescian
Loyal
Re: Christian deceptions: Was JeMary really a Virgin?

I accepted Tom Harpur's work as one of the most honest and up-to-date analysis of the character of Jesus mainly because of Mr. Harpur's renowned credentials, who personally did the research to quench his own yearning for answers humanity (and Christians) have asked. He is Canada's most outspoken theolgian and writes regularly in the Toronto Star where he has a regular column on religious issues. As with every other published article on Jesus, his view(s) will draw both public criticism, and support. In that society, Christianity is under attack almost continuosly, and Christians themselves who've read his book are grateful he cleared their skepticism. Many who've read his book have returned to the Church with a stronger sense of belief in Jesus than they had before. Yes, I read the book, a copy is still with me. What I like about what he says most is this - it is not important whether Jesus walked on earth or not, or if he rose from the dead. What is important is that his spirit is alive, and lives in us. And we carry his soul in everything we do. That is the essence of his words.

Cheers!

So you uncritically accepted as Gospel truth what Tom Harpur wrote in the Pagan Christ? Did you employ those reasoning and logical skills on this book with the same rigor that you used on Christianity? How did you go about critically evaluating the claims made in The Pagan Christ? What criteria did you use? I have come across many people whose sole criteria was “so long as it is against Christianity I will take it as true and accept it.” You said Tom Harpur spend years in studies. Well, so did many others that came away with a different view than him. Did you read their works? Or you conveniently ignore them because they are not what you want to believe in anyway? In short, how objective are you?

Just to add, an entire book has been written to address Tom's book titled "Unmasking the Pagan Christ". You should check it up if you are really objective. Another link below

http://www.mcmaster.ca/mjtm/pdfs/MJTM 6.7 Heath on Harpur.pdf
 

Agoraphobic

Alfrescian
Loyal
We get confused by the newspapers and other publications. Maybe we believe because we want to believe. (eg. I believe that Bigfoot, Yeti, Yowie, Orang Pendek exist) because it adds another dimension to our lives. We live in a world that is evil because there are opposing forces vying for limited resources on our planet. What may be evil to some, may at the same time, be good to their enemies. Take Communism. We are brought up to believe that Communists are our enemies. but on the other side, capitalist ideology brought sufferings and misery to societies who saw Communism as theiir salvation. It just depends which side one is with.

Cheers!

.................................................................................................................................................................................................
Whether you agree or not, we are living really in a evil and demonic world! Read the newspapers, go to Youtube, Google internet, you can easily conclude this for yourself.

God Bless
Psalm23
 

Frodo

Alfrescian
Loyal
I accepted Tom Harpur's work as one of the most honest and up-to-date analysis of the character of Jesus mainly because of Mr. Harpur's renowned credentials, who personally did the research to quench his own yearning for answers humanity (and Christians) have asked. He is Canada's most outspoken theolgian and writes regularly in the Toronto Star where he has a regular column on religious issues. As with every other published article on Jesus, his view(s) will draw both public criticism, and support. In that society, Christianity is under attack almost continuosly, and Christians themselves who've read his book are grateful he cleared their skepticism. Many who've read his book have returned to the Church with a stronger sense of belief in Jesus than they had before. Yes, I read the book, a copy is still with me. What I like about what he says most is this - it is not important whether Jesus walked on earth or not, or if he rose from the dead. What is important is that his spirit is alive, and lives in us. And we carry his soul in everything we do. That is the essence of his words.

Cheers!

So those theologians who are as credentialed as Harpur, if not more so, and have spent years of research, and come away with affirming the Bible's view of Jesus are not honest? What kind of stronger belief in Jesus are you talking about? A false Jesus with a false Gospel?
 

drifteri

Alfrescian
Loyal
Does the Hebrew Word Alma Really Mean “Virgin”?

For nearly two millennia the Church has insisted that the Hebrew word almah עַלְמָה can only mean “virgin.” This is a vital position for defenders of Christianity to take because Matthew 1:22-23 translates alma in Isaiah 7:14 as “virgin.” The first Gospel quotes this well known verse to provide the only “Old Testament” proof text for the supposed virgin birth of Jesus. The stakes are high for Christendom. If the Hebrew word alma does not mean a virgin, Matthew crudely misquoted the prophet Isaiah, and both a key tenet of Christianity and the credibility of the first Gospel collapses.

How accurate is this Christian claim? The only place to explore this assertion is in the Jewish Scriptures. If the Hebrew word alma means virgin, then each usage in the Bible must be either a clear reference to a virgin or at the very least appear ambiguous. The word alma appears in the Jewish Scriptures seven times in the feminine and twice in the masculine. If even one reference refers to a woman who is clearly not a virgin, then Matthew’s rendition of Isaiah 7:14 becomes untenable.

One of the places where the uncommon Hebrew word almah appears in the Bible is in the Book of Proverbs.

The word “proverb” means “to be like,” thus Proverbs is a book of comparisons between common, concrete images and life’s most profound truths. Proverbs are simple, moral statements (or illustrations) that highlight and teach fundamental realities about life. In the following passage, King Solomon presents the following vivid analogy:

There are three things which are too wonderful for me, for which I do not understand: 19the way of an eagle in the sky, the way of a serpent on a rock, the way of a ship in the middle of the sea, and the way of a man with a young woman [b’almah][/b’almah]. 20This is the way of an adulterous woman: she eats and wipes her mouth, and says, “I have done no wrong.”

(Proverbs 30:18-20)

In the above three verses, King Solomon compares a man with an alma to three other things: an eagle in the sky, a serpent on a rock, and a ship in the sea.

What do these four things all have in common?

They leave no trace.

After the eagle has flown across the sky, it is impossible to determine whether an eagle had ever flown through that airspace. Once a snake has slithered over a rock, there is no way to discern that the snake had ever crossed there (as opposed to a snake slithering over sand or grass, where it leaves a trail). After a ship passes through the sea, the wake behind it comes together and settles behind it, leaving no way to discern that a ship had ever moved through this body of water.

Similarly, King Solomon declares that once a man has been sexually intimate with an almah, i.e. a young woman, no trace of sexual intercourse is visible, unlike a virgin who will leave behind a discharge of blood after her hymen is broken.

Therefore, in the following verse (Proverbs 30:20) King Solomon explains that once this adulterous woman “eats” (a metaphor for her fornication), she removes the trace of her sexual infidelity, “wipes her mouth, and says, ‘I have done no wrong.’” The word alma clearly does not mean a virgin.

In the same way that in the English language the words “young woman” does not indicate sexual purity, in the Hebrew languagethere is no relationship between the words almah and virgin. On the contrary, it is usually a young woman who bears children. The word alma only conveys age/gender. Had Isaiah wished to speak about a virgin, he would have used the word betulah1 (בְּתוּלָה) not almah. The word betulah appears frequently in the Jewish Scriptures, and is the only word – in both biblical and modern Hebrew – that conveys sexual purity.

Moreover, as mentioned earlier, the masculine form of the noun עַלְמָה (alma) is עֶלֶם (elem), which means a “young man,” not a male virgin. This word appears twice in the Jewish Scriptures (I Samuel 17:56, 20:22). As expected, without exception, all Christian Bibles correctly translate עֶלֶם as a “young man,” “lad,” or “stripling,” never “virgin.” Why does theKing James Version of the Bible translate the masculine Hebrew noun לָעֶלֶם (la’elem) as “to the young man” in I Samuel 20:22, and yet the feminine form of the same Hebrew noun הָעַלְמָה as “a virgin” in Isaiah 7:14? The answer is Christian Bibles had no need to mistranslate I Samuel 20:22 because this verse was not misquoted in the New Testament.
 
Last edited:

drifteri

Alfrescian
Loyal
Honest or deliberate mistranslation?

1. “Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign: Behold, a Virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.” (Isaiah 7:14 - AV)

The indispensable “Virgin” in the above verse has now been replaced in the RSV with the phrase “a young woman,” which is the correct translation of the Hebrew word Almah. Almah is the word which has occurred all along in the Hebrew text and not bethulah which means Virgin. This correction is only to be found in the English language translation, as the RSV is only published in this tongue. For the African and the Afrikaner, the Arab and the Zulu, in fact, in the 1 500 other languages of the world, Christians are made to continue to swallow the misnomer “Virgin.” Gosh!

RSV all the way! :wink:
 

Agoraphobic

Alfrescian
Loyal
People are free to believe in whatever they choose with regards to the person we call the Christ. To some, he is a teacher, to others, the Son of God, God on Earth, or Messiah. Yest to others, he was a magician, a master con-man. To me, the character given in the Gospels is a man made model, a standard set that is to be aimed at, for humanity to strive. The perfect man. He is fictitious, but it should not prevent human beings from aspiring to be like that person. To the Buddhist, that person is an enlightened one.

Cheers!

So those theologians who are as credentialed as Harpur, if not more so, and have spent years of research, and come away with affirming the Bible's view of Jesus are not honest? What kind of stronger belief in Jesus are you talking about? A false Jesus with a false Gospel?
 

Frodo

Alfrescian
Loyal
People are free to believe in whatever they choose with regards to the person we call the Christ. To some, he is a teacher, to others, the Son of God, God on Earth, or Messiah. Yest to others, he was a magician, a master con-man. To me, the character given in the Gospels is a man made model, a standard set that is to be aimed at, for humanity to strive. The perfect man. He is fictitious, but it should not prevent human beings from aspiring to be like that person. To the Buddhist, that person is an enlightened one.

Cheers!

It seems that you have again avoided the question. When it comes to Tom Harpur, you say he is credentialed etc etc…when it comes to others you say they are free to believe what they like. We need to cut the postmodern self-defeating belief system where “to me this means this, to you this means that” as if there is no such thing as objective truth. Either Jesus existed or He did not, period. It is absurd and nonsensical to say “To me He did not exist, to you He does, and we are both correct.” I suppose you never heard of the law of non-contradiction, and yet you say you are rational and logical compared to those who believe?:rolleyes:
 

Agoraphobic

Alfrescian
Loyal
Different people can have different views. Communism is a good policy for some, yet to others, it is unimaginable. Jesus doesn't live today, if he does, where does he live, at what address? So, if he lived 2000 years ago, he lived in Nazareth? Or did he? I think he existed only in the minds of people who wished he lived. If Jesus existed, there are no records to prove he did. Every supposedly physical evidence proposed by archaelogists only speculates that Jesus "may have" walked here, or there, may have been crucified on this spot, or buried in that tomb. There is no hard evidence. Tom Harpur was an Anglican clergyman (or priest) or someone in some order of the Anglican Church. He spent his life studying theology, and like many people in that part of the world was constantly hounded by questions regarding the truth of the Bible and the person of Jesus Christ, so he took it as a personal quest to search for answers, and after time, could not find anything supportive for the exisitence of Jesus that was logical, but came across the stories of Mithra and Horus which paralelled the story of Jesus, and he concluded that the story of Jesus, was based on these earlier deities. Of course, many Christians will not have any of these "alternative" truths, preferring the comfort of the bible's narration, and the interpretation offered by their church. Their minds have already been moulded by the stories they've been told since early childhood, in cathecism and bible classes. And reinforced by being retold every Christmas and Easter (both of which also happen to be pagan in origins).

Cheers!

It seems that you have again avoided the question. When it comes to Tom Harpur, you say he is credentialed etc etc…when it comes to others you say they are free to believe what they like. We need to cut the postmodern self-defeating belief system where “to me this means this, to you this means that” as if there is no such thing as objective truth. Either Jesus existed or He did not, period. It is absurd and nonsensical to say “To me He did not exist, to you He does, and we are both correct.” I suppose you never heard of the law of non-contradiction, and yet you say you are rational and logical compared to those who believe?:rolleyes:
 

Frodo

Alfrescian
Loyal
Different people can have different views. Communism is a good policy for some, yet to others, it is unimaginable. Jesus doesn't live today, if he does, where does he live, at what address? So, if he lived 2000 years ago, he lived in Nazareth? Or did he? I think he existed only in the minds of people who wished he lived. If Jesus existed, there are no records to prove he did. Every supposedly physical evidence proposed by archaelogists only speculates that Jesus "may have" walked here, or there, may have been crucified on this spot, or buried in that tomb. There is no hard evidence. Tom Harpur was an Anglican clergyman (or priest) or someone in some order of the Anglican Church. He spent his life studying theology, and like many people in that part of the world was constantly hounded by questions regarding the truth of the Bible and the person of Jesus Christ, so he took it as a personal quest to search for answers, and after time, could not find anything supportive for the exisitence of Jesus that was logical, but came across the stories of Mithra and Horus which paralelled the story of Jesus, and he concluded that the story of Jesus, was based on these earlier deities. Of course, many Christians will not have any of these "alternative" truths, preferring the comfort of the bible's narration, and the interpretation offered by their church. Their minds have already been moulded by the stories they've been told since early childhood, in cathecism and bible classes. And reinforced by being retold every Christmas and Easter (both of which also happen to be pagan in origins).

Cheers!

It’s perfectly fine to have different views, since people do not possess same amount of information, nor do all reason correctly at all times. And as I have said before, even our worldviews will affect how we look at the same facts. Governance of a country is a matter of what works or not, nothing to do with the question of truth. Nobody will ask “is capitalism true?” because it is not a question of truth to be phrased in such a manner. If Jesus existed in the minds of people only, then everybody living right now is fooled, because we are saying He lived 2016 years ago based on the calendar we are using now. Again it is special pleading on your side to argue that Tom Harpur is somehow more honest simply because he did not accept the Bible’s record. He made his conclusions, but there are others who concluded otherwise, people who are no less dishonest or qualified than him. The arguments that Tom made have been addressed, even refuted. His claims have been weighted and found wanting. To find similarities and then conclude that one must have copied from the other, is as flaky a conclusion as the evolutionists who claim that just because there are similarities between an ape and a human being therefore they shared a common ancestor. This is not science at work, it is faulty reasoning.
 

Psalm23

Alfrescian
Loyal
And believing that the events in the Bible happened as described isn't even faulty reasoning - it is not even reasoning!

Cheers!

You are right! If everything is said in the Bible can be humanly reasoned, than that it should not be a Bible. It should be a work of pure literature. No human can really give reasons why things happened the way described in the Bible. Many of these defiled logics. In fact, the most controversial verse in the bible is the very first verse: In the beginning, God creates the heaven and the earth.

In terms of controversy, virgin birth cannot come to this verse. Scientists all over the world is wondering how truth or how not truth this verse is, and that is Did God really create the heaven and the earth (and all the things, living and non-living). Till now, not winners nor losers. And neither can scientists can truly explain how evolution works. All these explains on evolution are simply speculations. You cant prove nor disprove it, and just like creation too, you cannt prove nor disprove it. At best, we can come to some 'conclusions" by observations - can you really create something out of nothing? How you come to the conclusion has nothing to do with science (although science is trying hard to show it can. But the fact is it can never!). It is simply a believe system, a world view (which can never be tested through scientific experiments).

God Bless,
Psalm 23
 

Frodo

Alfrescian
Loyal
And believing that the events in the Bible happened as described isn't even faulty reasoning - it is not even reasoning!

Cheers!

How is it correct reasoning to believe the evolution story then? You have to be consistent. No special pleading fallacy please.
 

Agoraphobic

Alfrescian
Loyal
Yes. I agree with you - belief is based simply on faith. The Bible cannot be explained, either take it as written, or not. I choose not to. And so has many others. Some scientist have challenged the "authorities" (given the mandate on earth, to rule and govern by heaven) and have suffered personally as a result of their stances. Today, we know that they are correct as their theories have been proven by modern day instruments and accumulated knowledge. We may not be able to answer all the questions asked now, but as time progresses, so does our species, and the knowledge that we possess. We are still learning.

Cheers!

You are right! If everything is said in the Bible can be humanly reasoned, than that it should not be a Bible. It should be a work of pure literature. No human can really give reasons why things happened the way described in the Bible. Many of these defiled logics. In fact, the most controversial verse in the bible is the very first verse: In the beginning, God creates the heaven and the earth.

In terms of controversy, virgin birth cannot come to this verse. Scientists all over the world is wondering how truth or how not truth this verse is, and that is Did God really create the heaven and the earth (and all the things, living and non-living). Till now, not winners nor losers. And neither can scientists can truly explain how evolution works. All these explains on evolution are simply speculations. You cant prove nor disprove it, and just like creation too, you cannt prove nor disprove it. At best, we can come to some 'conclusions" by observations - can you really create something out of nothing? How you come to the conclusion has nothing to do with science (although science is trying hard to show it can. But the fact is it can never!). It is simply a believe system, a world view (which can never be tested through scientific experiments).

God Bless,
Psalm 23
 

Agoraphobic

Alfrescian
Loyal
Simple forms of organisms slowly develop and evolved into more complex forms. By analogy to the development of an embryo started off by the fusion of two cells, it grows (by division) to double its contents, and so on. After some time, when more cells amass, some of them separate and form specialized cells. Of course for evolution, the changes takes place over millions of years, too long for any one of us to live to observe. So in this, we extrapolate the data we have on hand over and beyond the time span of our lives, and draw a conclusion. These may be wrong, or right, we do not know for sure, but it sure is better than hearing it from some village elder who was told what an even earlier ancestor told him.

Cheers!

How is it correct reasoning to believe the evolution story then? You have to be consistent. No special pleading fallacy please.
 
Top