The JEHOVAH game (a modern fetish)

by Terry 97 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Pistoff

  Perry uses the sleight of hand of the magician and the religious: millions believe, it must be right. He says there are thousands of documents of provenance for biblical authorship by god, but cannot produce one that passes critical peer review.

  The thing is this; not only is there no provenance for thinking a supreme being authored or coached the bible along, centuries of exhaustive study by Wellhausen et al have provided credible evidence that there are at least 4 sources for the OT, blended together, redacted, between 700 and 400.

  The redacters portrayed the ancient israelites as being law abiding, sacrificing, priest respecting people; ergo, all now should respect the priesthood.

  When they were in trouble, the redacters showed them as being disobedient.

  Kings? BAD. Priests? GOOD. If we must have kings, the judean ones were tolerable. David, described as a murdering adulterer, is portrayed as the best even of the judean kings.

  The effect? Exactly like Terry's example of Reagan; Reagan was responsible for great growth, he was as conservative as us, therefore we are as right as Reagan. Rewriting the past lets them control the conversation in the present.

  That is classic redaction, and retrojection; another example is the right's claim that the founders of the US were christian. Of course, they are thinking of their own brand of christian, which is hard right and involves religious influence in government. The founders were actually deists, they were slaveholders and they were rich white landowners, not fundamental christians.

  The bible is not historically accurate but is of great value; it documents the trials of a people who could not understand why bad things happened to them, and invented reasons for it. It is filled with stories that document the development of ethics that really were unique to the area for the time.

  It is a living document that, when studied in it's context, sketches the growth of 2 of the world's "great" religions.

  Perry, if you have faith that God wrote the bible, you don't need proof. Abandon the idea that there is proof, proof is NOT your friend.

  You accept Jesus as the Christ; that is your choice, based on a theological understanding of who you think he was.

  I do not accept him as christ, but I am astounded at the unique ideas and teachings. He was a social and religious radical; he favored tipping over the existing religious and social order.

  How can that radicalism inform our view of today's social order and religious culture? Is the same hypocrisy and class structure present today?

  Jesus ate with whores and sinners; his parable of the Samaritan must have revolted his listeners. Who are the modern outcasts? AIDS patients? Gays?

  Illegal immigrants? Who would the Samaritan be? A Muslim?

  This matters more to me than being reassured that my moral failings are abetted by his being prematurely killed.

  P
• 

  Terry

  What was a Greek or Roman pagan referring to when he or she spoke about a DEMI-GOD?

  A demigod is a half mortal, half God. A demigod posses God like characteristic, in which some are humanly impossible, or exaggerations in which a mortal couldn't obtain; however posses certain mortal characteristics which leaves them vulnerable by mortal standards.

  How do Christians defend against the accusation that Jesus fit the definition of a Demi-God?

  Christians shaped their rebuttals over time until, after many debates, arguments and conferences they INVENTED an Ad Hoc definition.

  How does this refute the Demi-God definition?

  Jesus is asserted out of necessity into being FULLY god and FULLY human BOTH simultaneously!

  Christians can say--"Look, a demi-god is HALF-God and Half-Human; Jesus isn't! It is a silly and disengenuous scheme. But, it works for them.

  Why would Christians who were originally Jewish ever accept such a pagan definition into their monotheistic religion?

  Tribal Jews absorbed into Greek culture against their will just as they were absorbed into Persian and Babylonian culture previously. The Jews born into a new culture cannot help but pick up the language and customs no matter how hard their parents may resist.

  Alexander the Great conquered the known world and spread Greek religious ideas along with language. In a relatively short time (a few Centuries) Jews could not even speak Hebrew any longer. This is the main reason their scriptures were forced into the Greek language. (Septuagint).

  What sort of demi-gods were Jews exposed to? What were the stories and characteristics they'd hear about and absorb into their thinking?

  Internationally, the list of demi-gods is quite extensive:

  • Achilles
  • Aeacus
  • Aeneas
  • Amphion
  • Arcas
  • Clymene
  • Cycnus
  • Dardanus
  • The Dioscuri, Castor and Polydeuces
  • Epaphus
  • Gilgamesh
  • Helen
  • Heracles (also known by the Roman spelling, Hercules)
  • Iasion
  • Lacedaemon
  • Maui (Hawaiian)
  • Minos
  • Memnon
  • Orion
  • Orpheus
  • Perseus (mythology)
  • Rhadamanthus
  • Sarpedon
  • Theseus
  • Tityas
  • Zetes
  • Zethus

  Were any of these demi-gods also BORN OF A VIRGIN

  ?

  Roman/Greek: Demeter and Persephone, Rhea and Zeus, Apollo
  
  In Egypt, virgin mother Isis begat Horus
  
  In Phrygia, Attis was born of the virgin Nama.
  
  A nymph bathing in a river in China is touched by a lotus plant, and the divine Fohi is born.
  
  In Siam, a wandering sunbeam caresses a girl in her teens, and the great and wonderful deliverer, Codom, is born.
  
  In the life of Buddha we read that he descended on his mother Maya, "in likeness as the heavenly queen, and entered her womb," and was born from her right side, to save the world."
  
  In Greece, the young god Apollo visits a fair maid of Athens, and a Plato is ushered into the world.
  
  From Greece comes the virgin birth of Adonis, who was resurrected after being killed by a wild boar. Adonis was revered by the Phoenicians as a dying-and-rising god, and Athenians held Adonia, a yearly festival representing his death and resurrection, in midsummer.
  
  From the Americas comes a remarkable story of the god-man Quetzalcoatl told by the Aztecs and Mayans. Not only did he have a virgin birth, but he was associated with the planet Venus, the morning star, as was Jesus. In addition, the religion built around him used the cross as a symbolic representation. Like the myths around Jesus, Quetzalcoatl said he would return to claim his earthly kingdom.
  
  Mithra was a Persian god who was also a virgin birth, but was more than just a tribal god. Mithra was born in a cave and had twelve companions. Mithra's birthday was also on December 25th. Both religions celebrate the resurrection at Easter. Much of what we know about Mithracism today came from the Christians. The prophet Zoroaster was also born of a virgin.
  
  Perseus and Hercules all experienced virgin births after being fathered by yet other gods. Horus, Mithra, Dionysus and Krishna were all born on December 25th., their births were announced by "stars", attended by 'wise men', involved humble birth locations, entailed the massacre of innocents and fleeing for safety from enemies, and so on and on.
  
  A Roman savior Quirrnus was born of a virgin.
  
  In Tibet, Indra was born of a virgin. He ascended into heaven after death.
  
  In India, the god Krishna was born of the virgin Devaki.
  
  Virgin births were claimed for many Egyptian pharaohs, Greek emperors and for Alexander the Great of Greece.

  Should we be suspicious that Jesus so neatly fits the pagan pattern of things?

  Is there any alternate explanation

  ?

  Yes, we could naively assert it is JUST COINCIDENCE that Jesus happened to be born of a virgin, have the powers of a god, be part of a Trinity.

  But, wasn't Jesus different than all those pagan deities and demi-gods?

  Yes, committees of arguing christians shaped their definitions of Jesus gradually into being different just-enough to hold him up as superior.

  These are differences of ad hoc explanations purely invented to get themselves out of a theological jam.

  Remember, the Council of Nicea was convoked to settle differences of opinion and to create an aritficial agreement and orthodoxy.

  Judaism had faded after 70 A.D. and the Pagan Christian had superceded the Jewish Christian.

  Catholic doctrine superceded early Judeo-christian proto-belief by making Orthodoxy "pure" and other belief Heresy.

  What conclusion can be reached about the nature of Jesus in terms of Greek and Roman and Egyptian and Persian and Babylonian myth?

  Christian myth was built right along the same lines using the same proto-types and template.

  Any differences were artificially created to make Jesus a "better brand name".
• 

  Perry

  Terry,

  Good questions. There has been a lot of pop-history books written on these topics. I have a (nearly) minor degree from Texas State University in Classical Studies - Greek and Roman History (took all the necessary courses with honors). I can tell you that the books I have read with these alleged fundamental links are simply lacking sound historical backing.

  At university I became familiar with the major historians and these Links are just not there in those works. Most of these charges are based on "just so" stories that might ring true to the novice but not the serious historian. This link can help the (above) average person sort it out.

  WAS JESUS A COPY CAT SAVIOR MYTH?

  I'll be off-line for a couple of weeks mostly. Enjoyed your thread.
• 

  Terry

  Students who enter Universities are choosing a filter.

  What do they want to be programmed into learning?

  I use the word "programmed" decidedly.

  Each thing we read represents a polarity. Each person writing has a worldview. Objective scholarship is difficult to come by.

  That is why graduating from a particular school is like magnetising a piece of metal. There is an internal alignment which attracts you to certain

  views always. The confirmation bias that comes with the diploma creates a blind spot for other things.

  When it comes to religious schools and the choice of Texts and Histories and Proofs we have a core polarization process.

  It usually comes down to being branded with a BIAS against. Against "what"? The "other".

  The actual history of Christianity is a clash of opinion, temperments and biases.

  It was A WAR; a battle of ideas wrought by deeply invested people.

  Catholicism won with the power of Rome until the corruption toppled it as the "universal" church.

  Competition waged a bitter series of actual flesh and blood wars until Protestantism stood as a binary rival.

  Now Protestantism has had internecine wars of its own and stands shorter and more diverse.

  There really is no winner.

  Corruption is corruption and blind faith is irrational.

  They all point to scripture as the fundamental arbiter of faith. Yet, there is no uncorrupt original text to prove fraud has not prevailed.

  In the absence of original texts and uncorrupt proof we have only to look at the history of Christianity to see the fruits of human imagination posing as God's enforcer of "purity".
• 

  Perry

  Yet, there is no uncorrupt original text to prove fraud has not prevailed.

  First, you said that the bible was a mess of a document. I've tried to demonstrate that there are no reputable scholars that woud dispute the fact that the KJV is supported by over 99% of all known manuscripts and that when the Alexandrian texts are removed from the picture there is virtually 100% agreement from those texts...many of which go bact to 125 and 150 AD.

  But now your fixed views must be supported by a new claim that the original texts are needed to prove that a fraud didn't occur! If you are going to go there, Prove God doesn't exist while you are at it! Prove a negative, go ahead I dare you.
• 

  Terry

  But now your fixed views must be supported by a new claim that the original texts are needed to prove that a fraud didn't occur! If you are going to go there, Prove God doesn't exist while you are at it! Prove a negative, go ahead I dare you.

  Do you stand on a ladder to miss the point I just made?

  The point I just made was that Christianity is based on interpretations of corrupt translations.

  So, historically speaking, what Christianity has done BY FOLLOWING THOSE CORRUPT TEXTS should be truly ungodly things.

  Were they?

  The first millennium of Catholicism and the next thousand of Protestantism should test the fruits of your premise quite exhaustively.

  What have been the fruits of Christianity following the Bible?

  (Hint: don't forget the Thirty Years War.)

  That would be my proof.

  Here is a great test for God.

  Go gather up some firewood and pour water over the wood and pray for fire in your God's name.

  Report back to me on the size of the fire you get.

  This was an "authentic and scriptural" test from the Bible.

  If it worked back then it should work just fine now.

  I'll be waiting...................

  p.s. check out this link:

  http://www.lepg.org/wars.htm
• 

  Perry

  The point I just made was that Christianity is based on interpretations of corrupt translations.

  And that is a premise that I've challenged in depth over the last few weeks. Show me the money.

  There have always been Christians IN ADDITION TO Protestants and Catholics who remained separate from Caesar. REMEMBER ?? The fact that many Protestants and Catholics disobeyed Jesus command to separate God's things and Caesars things PROVES Jesus words to be true regarding the wheat and the weeds .... not disproves it.

  I keep showing your the picture right side up ....and you keep turning the picture upside down. Are you denying that there are TWO pictures of historical Christianity like the WT does?
• 

  Terry

  There have always been Christians IN ADDITION TO Protestants and Catholics who remained separate from Caesar.

  Are you saying the TRUE Christian is the Heretic of old?

  Who are these people to whom you refer?

  Does the Bible mention these persons?

  What standard to you use to identify these persons?

  Does this mean mainstream Protestantism and Catholicism is a lie?

  I keep showing your the picture right side up ....and you keep turning the picture upside down. Are you denying that there are TWO pictures of historical Christianity like the WT does?

  I believe it is the WATCHTOWER that espouses exactly what you are saying! They claim a remnant of stragglers throughout the ages have maintained pure worship. Did you forget that, Perry?