Bible Questions?

There is nothing to look up, your answers are flawed and dwell in circular logic, based in fantasy and often times contradict themselves.

 

Describe our limitations of sensational awareness as it pertains to nailing lunatic preachers to planks of cedar please.

I agree with this, knowledge is constantly being shared but what does it have to do with an omnipotent force that limits it's own powers in order to give us free will and by doing so forfeiting it's omnipotents?

There can be only one highlander as well.

 

Being so dense as to requiring the most extreme example.

One will means no opposing will. Omnipotent.

 

But what is a human sacrifice an example of?

I do not share the same will as you, I do not know your motivations I do not know what drives you, how can it be said that we all have the same will?

 

In combination with resurrection, the veracity of the teaching.

Cut of both of our air supplies and our will can be shown the same.

 

How can it be said that the teaching's are true, where is the evidence for the resserection for the life of Brian, errr, Jesus?

when you look upon a dead body what will do you see in it?

 

The story is evidence of a teaching



[/QUOTE]
when you look upon a dead body what will do you see in it?[/QUOTE]
My own.

 

A teaching of what?

Are you implying that you like to impose your "will" on dead bodies?

Can you elaborate?

 

I have no doubt that Christianity absorbed pagan elements, that the concept of the Logos was Platonic, etc. Many of these ideas are embedded in the Canon that you seem to accept as God's word. Do you think that John's identification of Jesus with the Logos wasn't influenced by Plato? To say that later followers of Plato developed the Trinity from his ideas is probably the same as saying early Christian neo-Platonists developed the idea of the Trinity. But it was their doing, not Plato's. Name me a non-Christian Platonist who advanced this idea. I do believe that the concept of the Trinity was developed as early Christians grappled with what to make of their departed Jesus, and Hellenistic ideas helped them out. Judaism was already well-contaminated by Zoroastrian notions of Satan and hell, which the Sadduccees resisted but apparently Jesus' followers accepted. The Essenes, in particular, seem to have been influenced by Pythagorean thought.

As for your string of quotations, if I did something like that you'd dismiss them readily enough as the views of misguided mortals--the secularist agnostic Will Durant, etc. What were the three persons of the Egyptian Trinity? Isis, Osiris/Serapis and Horus? That was a family, not an entity. There were also three important, co-equal Sumerian-Babylonian dieties (Anu, Enil, and Enki). And of course there is the Roman/Etruscan holy family: Jupiter, Juno and Minerva. It might be that these trios influenced early Christian thinking on the subject, but the idea of three deities and the three-in-one concept of the Trinity is a stretch. One could as easily argue that the Jewish tradition of Spirit, Presence, and Wisdom as aspects of Yaweh inspired the doctrine, although Jewish monotheists would be horrified. All that is speculative--like the idea that Jesus was really a copy of Horus. I'm aware of an Egyptian hymn of the 14th century B.C., stating the unity of Ra, Amun and Ptah. Is that enough? I think we need more direct evidence connecting that to Christian thought. The Hindu Trimurti is obviously a trinity, but that was a Hindu idea. Is there any direct evidence that Hindu beliefs influenced early Christian thinkers?

Ironically, what you've presented is similar in methodology to the Zeitgeist film that was put together to discredit Christianity--based on loose speculation about parallels between the Jesus story and pagan gods, e.g., Jesus is copied from Horus, Dionysus, Serrapis, Atis, etc. The Devil is in the details.

Behind your thesis is the assumption that everything "pagan" is bad and corrupting. What we call civilization was largely the contribution of pagans. Plato, Socrates, Aristotle, Epictetus, Marcus Aurelius,etc., not to mention the Buddha. Along with the awe of the natural order and the fitness of the universe, my awe of these contributions is a major source of my faith. So I guess that makes me corrupt and degenerate--along with Saint Augustine and Saint Thomas Aquinas. I'll admit there was plenty of pagan influence in Christian and even Jewish thought, but it wasn't all bad. In fact, I regard the synthesis of Judaism and Hellenistic thought to be Christianity's great contribution to civilization--thanks to Paul and the enlightened church fathers.

 

essential nature.

No, I see by virtue of my will to be.

 

If anything Zoroastrian absorbed elements from Christianity (It was only years later that Zoroastrian claimed anything similar), and I see nothing that resembles the notion of an immortal spirit body contained in the human soul anywhere in the Bible so how can it be neo-platonic since Plato believed in one, and there is no trinity in the Bible. The idea of a trinity was not a part of the earliest congregation.

Horus was part of the Godhead of Ra, but comparing this story overall to Jesus isn't very compelling when looked at more deeply. Even Egyptologists deny that there are similarities between the stories.

There is new evidence showing that the Bible was probably written much earlier than previously thought:

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2010-01/uoh-mah010710.php

 

If by Zoroastrianism you mean Mithaism, which was a Zoroastrian offshoot, there may have been mutual influence. One of the early church fathers, Justin Martyr, argued that similarities between Christianity and other religions (Mithraism and the cult of Dionysus, in particular)were put there by Satan in advance to confuse Christians. You need to specify what claims we're talking about. Mithra's virgin birth, for example, is likely to have been borrowed from Christians. In earlier forms, he was born from a rock (petra)--not exactly a virgin. Some scholars speculate that the Catholic petrine doctrine may have been influenced by Mithra (one of those "pagan" influences OWB is talking about). Martin Larson, in The Story of Christianity, advances the thesis that both Christianity and Mithraism derived from the same sources, as Zoroastrian ideas met the Egyptian Osiris cult. In the Christian case, this would have been mediated through Judaism via the Essenes.

 

I fail to see how a supposed human sacrifice roughly 2000 years ago taught humans essential nature, yyou realize that human culture predates the story of christ correct?

If it was essential nature that was being divinly given to the people of that age what of the people who predate it?

So says the human fortune cookie.

 

Nope

 

I have never said that the study of such Philosophers is wrong but when you use them to corrupt true worship, as you have plainly stated you have, then you are wrong. As for pagans I have nothing against them per say but again their doctrines should not be used to corrupt pure worship.

As for the rest, you said that there were no trinities for apostate Christians to absorb, I merely pointed at that there were. If you don't like what I pointed out, fine, look it up for yourself but you'll just find out that there where plenty around at the time and that the concept had been around much longer than that.

The fact is plain and simple, True worshipers do not now nor have they ever worshiped a trinity. They did not grapple with what to make of their departed Jesus, and Hellenistic ideas did not help them out. True worshipers knew exactly who Jesus was and why he departed and still do.

 

I can't think of a greater display of love then for someone to give their life for their friends and enemies.

Yes.

Yep.

Facinating. Yes.

Just because God knows what will happen doen't mean he influences the decision.

 

:groupwave:

 

I meant that the resurrection was borrowed afterward. But to be honest, I am unsure of how much Zoroastrian influenced the 'idea' of Satan. It really depends on the character and what he was and how the Bible and when the Bible calls attention to him and when Zoro was first written. Because my thinking is that, if Zoro influenced the Bible then what exactly did it influence, since what was influenced could be similar to what we thought other religions to influence Christians, such as the case with Mithras (Most 'virgin births' being a womb transference and so-called virgins paradoxically had sex yet still remained a virgin ).

 

Is worshiping Jesus true worship or something different?

While he spoke these things to them, behold, there came a certain ruler, and worshipped him, saying, My daughter is even now dead: but come and lay your hand upon her, and she shall live
Matthew 9:18

Then they that were in the ship came and worshipped him, saying, Of a truth you are the Son of God
Matthew 14:33

Then she came and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me
Matthew 15:25

And as they went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet, and worshipped him
Matthew 28:9

When they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted
Matthew 28:17

 

It is not the sacrifice that is the lesson. It is the whole living example, the course of life, the impermanence of death, the path to genuine fulfillment. A lesson meant for those who are weary and heavy laden.

Helpful is a matter of timing. What of them? The information is always there. This a particular form at a particular juncture.

If you are referring to me, it would follow because I am the one that you asked.