Article to discuss or argue over: Buddha, Abraham, Jesus and Muhammed: Larger-than-life historic figures or largely legends?

by AndersonsInfo 18 Replies latest jw friends

  • AndersonsInfo
    AndersonsInfo

    I've posted a link to an article that contains important food for thought. As we search for information to free our minds and hearts of cult-like thinking which entails being able to critically think, we need to ponder research that is available to help us to make important decisions. We need to allow ourselves to consider other possibilities, something that JW’s are discouraged from doing. Life is an adventure, not just a journey. There’s so much to learn, so much to think about and just when we settle on an idea, etc., something more on the subject pops up and reevaluation begins again. That’s the exciting part of being FREE from mind manipulation by anyone. “You are the master of your destiny”

    Please understand that in no way am I endeavoring to influence the reader to accept or deny religion, but only to broaden out our worldview. However, as we continue our still-healing journey, we should always acknowledge individual variation that is typical of all humankind and be respectful of others with a view to doing our best to make the world a better or nicer place to live in.

    https://www.alternet.org/2021/12/did-jesus-exist/

  • Anony Mous
    Anony Mous

    Amongst scholars it is widely accepted that these books are largely myths and that the people didn’t exist as described.

    The mythological story in these books is more important than the actual facts, that is how people until the renaissance used to communicate, everyone understood that books weren’t written as fact but mythology that gave you the basis for morality, law etc. The books weren’t actually written down until around the Roman periods and assembled very similar to the work that the Grimm brothers did in Germany and Eastern Europe in their day.

    Basically, the individual books of the Bible were the spoken stories of their day people built their entire way of living around it as it was an important anchor that helped you function properly in society. The stories were just a way of transferring dry facts across generations. Children won’t remember boring watchtower studies, but they will remember fantastical stories, and those stories have a grain of truth but more importantly, knowledge that needs to be transferred and values that need to be taught.

    So in my opinion, these stories are very important and valuable, it’s very evident that this is a compendium of almost 250,000 years of human and pre-human wisdom that has been filtered and compressed and needs to be taken serious. You don’t take it as fact, you take it as a lesson.

  • truth_b_known
    truth_b_known

    Thank you for sharing the article. Here is an important part that I would like to share my thoughts on -

    If we understand the birth and evolution of religions as natural processes, we can predict what kinds of religions may emerge in the future. For example, any emergent religion right now would have to be science compatible, or science-proof. As Robert Wright pointed out, as societies and religions become more interdependent, grow bigger and bigger, they have to be more inclusive, or they simply won’t be able to compete with those that are.

    Philosopher Ken Wilber speaks about his Integral movement in religion. There are those who are pathfinders in making Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, and Buddhism come into agreement with science as well as be inclusive as modern society is. Obviously the hard nosed evangelicals have heartache with this. A study of Martin Luther, his Reformation movement, and how it is roadblocking this is all too apparent in the U.S.

    What find interest is this article mentions Buddha/Buddhism right from the get go, but never speaks about it. The reason for this, as Ken Wilber shares in his first book on the Integral movement, is that Buddhism is the first rational religion. Only now is it becoming apparent with modern psychology studies and quantum physics how Siddhartha Gautama, the first Buddha and founder of Buddhism, had it right all along. I appreciate how Gautama stated he was not a god, was not to be worshipped, and to not take his word alone as being true, but rather test his teachings to be sure they are valid. There is no god or personal creator in Buddhism.

    I appreciate Anony Mous comment So in my opinion, these stories are very important and valuable, it’s very evident that this is a compendium of almost 250,000 years of human and pre-human wisdom that has been filtered and compressed and needs to be taken serious. You don’t take it as fact, you take it as a lesson.

    As one outspoken Atheist has brought up (I wish I could find the quote again) that Antitheism is proof of ignorance as religion does have a valid purpose. Any person who claims all religion has no value does not understand religion well enough to know better.

  • shadowclone
    shadowclone

    Posting this link is an endorsement that it is worthy of serious consideration. The article is obviously slanted to an agnostic or atheist viewpoint. It will provide further ammunition that you are mentally diseased and your claims about child sexual abuse are consequently highly suspect. Unfortunate in my opinion.

    Also, in my opinion, the article is a work of pseudoscience and does not merit any serious consideration. Regardless of your beliefs I think that an honest reader of the Bible can come to no other conclusion than that it stands out as different in comparison to other ancient religious writings.

  • Sea Breeze
    Sea Breeze

    Hi Barbara,


    This author recently wrote an article titled "5 historical truths that suggest Jesus never existed". She's a psychologist.

    It looks like this author is just another radical anti-theist who has jumped onto the band-wagon of Mysticism. Bart Ehrmann, who is currently the world's top atheist-leaning bible critic, says that such a view makes proponents of these kinds of myths (the myth that denies Jesus' existence) " look foolish to the outside world."

    He cautions his atheist friends to not go down this road:

    https://www.str.org/w/bart-ehrman-on-the-existence-of-jesus



    On the other hand, modern scholarship on Jesus and the Resurrection, has been moving in the opposite direction in the past 35 years as Dr. Habermas explains here at the University of California Santa Barbara:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOW7k3hQ-vE&ab_channel=FallenEmbers



  • pistolpete
    pistolpete
    Sea Breeze

    Bart Ehrmann, who is currently the world's top atheist-leaning bible critic,

    SB I can see that you either never read any of Bart's book or allow your bias to skew his scholarship on Jesus

    Bart has NEVER been an atheist and his almost 1 billion followers and readers who have read or heard his debates know this.

    Most Christian Scholars who have debated him concede that it's impossible to refute him because you can't refute historical accounts but you can always refute theology since theology is just religious belief not historical truth.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pxz4eyR9U5w

  • Diogenesister
    Diogenesister

    Listening to him speak and having read nearly every one of his books I think it's pretty hard not to come to the conclusion Bart Erhman is an atheist.

    He's disingenuous and knows which side his bread is buttered on.

  • WTWizard
    WTWizard

    All are fictitious characters intended to help joke-hova to enslave the world. Jesus is nothing more than the archetype of the perfect slave. Follow that abomination, and you will become the perfect slave. And the others are no better.

  • Sea Breeze
    Sea Breeze

    PP:

    I think your misunderstood me. I didn't say he was an atheist. Bart Ehrman is characterized as being "agnostic leaning toward atheist" by Dr. Habermas on the video I linked to above. So, that is how I characterized him.

    As a side note: the world's most famous atheist characterizes himself as an agnostic when pressed - Richard Dawkins.

    Richard Dawkins publicly argued for the position of
    militant atheism and claimed that he will not feel anything after death (see also: Ex-atheists).[6][7][8] Despite arguing for the position of militant atheism previously, Dawkins told the Archbishop Dr. Rowan Williams that he never said was an atheist.[9][10][11] See also: Atheism and historical revisionism

  • Pete Zahut
    Pete Zahut
    we should always acknowledge individual variation that is typical of all humankind and be respectful of others with a view to doing our best to make the world a better or nicer place to live in.

    While I agree, I am reminded of the way the Watchtower, instead of simply presenting information to us as individuals and letting us draw our own conclusions, used to always follow up by telling us what we should be thinking or striving to to, in light of what they’ve just told us.

    ”As true Christians me must always strive to…

    ”As thinking persons, we realize that…

    “Lovers of truth will agree that…

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit