>On Mar 30, 5:10 pm, Alec Brady <alec.br...@virgin.net> wrote: >> On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 03:40:49 -0700 (PDT), Giles <g_har...@yahoo.co.uk> >> wrote:
>> >On Mar 28, 3:07 pm, Alec Brady <alec.br...@virgin.net> wrote: >> >> On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 06:25:12 -0700 (PDT), Giles <g_har...@yahoo.co.uk> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >Don't you want the gospel accounts to indicate there really was an >> >> >ascension into the sky?
>> >> Why is what I want relevant here?
>> >I did not realise that even catholics were so flexible on something as >> >long-standing as the church's views of the ascension.
>> Do you think I am disagreeing with the Catholic Church's understanding >> of the Ascension? Bring your evidence.
>Are you saying that the CC never taught that Jesus rose bodily into >the sky?
I'm pretty sure the CC never required belief in any specific physical occurrence as being how the ascension must have happened.
>If so, in the proper spirit of wikipedia you could go to their website >and make some corrections.
>"The Ascension of Christ is spoken of as an accepted fact. Christians >do not interpret this as a "state of full consciousness," but rather a >literal rising from the earth into the sky." Wikipedia
I'm sure many Christians do so interpret it, and I doubt that they would suffer any spiritual harm from doing so. But the CC doesn't teach that it was necessarily a vertical ascent into the sky. If I had to choose (as the Wikipedia article suggests) between such an ascent and a metaphorical 'ascent into full consciousness', I guess I'd go for the painfully literal reading. But the CC doesn't ask for that. The ascension was an event in which Jesus left this universe in his body.
Rather than reading Wikipedia, why not try the Catholic Encyclopedia (1907)? Its says: "The language used by the Evangelists to describe the Ascension must be interpreted according to usage. To say that He was taken up or that He ascended, does not necessarily imply that they locate heaven directly above the earth; no more than the words "sitteth on the right hand of God" mean that this is His actual posture. In disappearing from their view "He was raised up and a cloud received Him out of their sight" (Acts 1:9), and entering into glory He dwells with the Father in the honour and power denoted by the scripture phrase." http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01767a.htm
The Catechism of the Catholic Church is likewise very reticent about the precise physical events (http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p1s2c2a6.htm) - and rightly so, as neither Scripture nor Tradition sees fit to enlighten us as to exactly what the ascension consisted of.
>> >> >If you feel the bible only indicates Jesus >> >> >disappeared in a cloud, why isn't the event known as The Disappearance >> >> >rather than The Ascension?
>> >> Tradition.
>> >How could the church have got it so wrong for so long?
>> Got what wrong? He ascended to the Father. What are you suggesting the >> Church has got wrong?
>So a rising into the sky of Jesus has never been taught?
Not as a doctrine of the faith, no. It has often been depicted that way, but that's not the same thing.
>> >What keeps you from deciding that it is only tradition that Jesus was >> >(a) God?
>> Where have I (ever) used the phrase 'only tradition'?
>Not "only tradition," just "tradition." In connection with the >ascension.
Well, *you* said 'only tradition'.
It is, indeed, Tradition that Jesus was God (as well as being more or less explicitly stated in Scripture). However, perhaps it would have been clearer if I'd said 'convention' was the reason for speaking of 'Ascension' rather than 'Disappearance'. Some doctrines are given different names in East and West ('Assumption' vs. 'Dormition' for example). What we call them is less important than what they say.
(When an Oxbrdge student is 'sent down', do you imagine that this is a claim about a vertical descent? Why not?)
>> >> What's important is that Jesus went to the Father, keeping his body. >> >> How that happened physically is less important.
>> >But the idea that it is still important to you that Jesus kept his >> >body, comes from the very old belief in the bodily ascension into the >> >sky, even if you yourself don't want to believe in a bodily ascension >> >into the sky.
>> Where did I say I didn't want to believe in a bodily ascension into >> the sky? And why is what I want relevant here?
>I had thought that the CC view was still that Jesus rose bodily into >the sky, and that perhaps for reasons of embarrassment now we're in >the 21st century, you had developed your own personal take on the >Ascension.
As I say, if you look at the Catholic Encyclopedia from a hundred years ago it doesn't insist on movement into the sky. If you can find some earlier - preferably magisterial - document that does insist on that, I'd be interested to see it. But so far the only evidence you seem to have is that this is what you imagined. Well, colour me unconvinced!
>Forgive me for not being aware of any adjustments to the doctrine.
What on earth makes you think there have been any adjustments to the doctrine?
>Don't some still have the view that the Ascension did involve a rising >up into the sky of Jesus, because the disciples thought heaven was up >there, and so would understand what was going on and not be frightened?
> I'm sure many Christians do so interpret it, and I doubt that they > would suffer any spiritual harm from doing so. But the CC doesn't > teach that it was necessarily a vertical ascent into the sky. If I had > to choose (as the Wikipedia article suggests) between such an ascent > and a metaphorical 'ascent into full consciousness', I guess I'd go > for the painfully literal reading. But the CC doesn't ask for that. > The ascension was an event in which Jesus left this universe in his > body.
> Rather than reading Wikipedia, why not try the Catholic Encyclopedia > (1907)?
On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:27:05 +0100, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
>On 2008-03-31, Alec Brady wrote:
>> I'm sure many Christians do so interpret it, and I doubt that they >> would suffer any spiritual harm from doing so. But the CC doesn't >> teach that it was necessarily a vertical ascent into the sky. If I had >> to choose (as the Wikipedia article suggests) between such an ascent >> and a metaphorical 'ascent into full consciousness', I guess I'd go >> for the painfully literal reading. But the CC doesn't ask for that. >> The ascension was an event in which Jesus left this universe in his >> body.
>> Rather than reading Wikipedia, why not try the Catholic Encyclopedia >> (1907)?
>Wikipedia's easier to read!
So's Horrid Henry; I wouldn't go there to discover the truth about controverted points of theology either!
27 stumbling blocks for this atheist in accepting the Christian belief that Jesus was God and ascended to heaven: "The following world saviors and "sons of God," were crucified or executed and were resurrected from the dead and ascended to heaven. They predate the so- called Jesus Christ." http://www.destee.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41935
1. Adad of Assyria 2. Adonis, Apollo, Heracles ("Hercules") and Zeus of Greece 3. Alcides of Thebes 4. Attis of Phrygia 5. Baal of Phoenicia 6. Bali of Afghanistan 7. Beddru of Japan 8. Buddha of India 9. Crite of Chaldea 10. Deva Tat of Siam 11. Hesus of the Druids 11. Horus, Osiris, and Serapis of Egypt, whose long-haired, bearded appearance was adopted for the Christ character 12. Indra of Tibet/India 13. Jao of Nepal 14. Krishna of India 15. Mikado of the Sintoos 16. Mithra of Persia 17. Odin of the Scandinavians 18. Prometheus of Caucasus/Greece 19. Quetzalcoatl of Mexico 20. Salivahana of Bermuda 21. Tammuz of Syria (who was, in a typical mythmaking move, later turned into the disciple Thomas 22. Thor of the Gauls 23. Universal Monarch of the Sibyls 24. Wittoba of the Bilingonese 25. Xamolxis of Thrace 26. Zarathustra/Zoroaster of Persia 27. Zoar of the Bonz _______________________________ If people are told in their religion that their god ascended into heaven it seems that this is said as a sort of clincher. "If you're still in doubt, let me tell you our god ascended into heaven. Satisfied?"
>27 stumbling blocks for this atheist in accepting the Christian belief >that Jesus was God and ascended to heaven: "The following world >saviors and "sons of God," were crucified or executed and were >resurrected from the dead and ascended to heaven. They predate the so- >called Jesus Christ." http://www.destee.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41935
>1. Adad of Assyria >2. Adonis, Apollo, Heracles ("Hercules") and Zeus of Greece >3. Alcides of Thebes >4. Attis of Phrygia >5. Baal of Phoenicia >6. Bali of Afghanistan >7. Beddru of Japan >8. Buddha of India >9. Crite of Chaldea >10. Deva Tat of Siam >11. Hesus of the Druids >11. Horus, Osiris, and Serapis of Egypt, whose long-haired, bearded >appearance was adopted for the Christ character >12. Indra of Tibet/India >13. Jao of Nepal >14. Krishna of India >15. Mikado of the Sintoos >16. Mithra of Persia >17. Odin of the Scandinavians >18. Prometheus of Caucasus/Greece >19. Quetzalcoatl of Mexico >20. Salivahana of Bermuda >21. Tammuz of Syria (who was, in a typical mythmaking move, later >turned into the disciple Thomas >22. Thor of the Gauls >23. Universal Monarch of the Sibyls >24. Wittoba of the Bilingonese >25. Xamolxis of Thrace >26. Zarathustra/Zoroaster of Persia >27. Zoar of the Bonz >_______________________________ >If people are told in their religion that their god ascended into >heaven it seems that this is said as a sort of clincher. "If you're >still in doubt, let me tell you our god ascended into heaven. >Satisfied?"
Giles, methinks you are trying to justify your position too hard. Tell me, did you find this on the Internet, or did you examine them all yourself? [1]
Since 'gods' are usually regarded as 'living in heaven' your list seems a little tautological.
The importance to Christians is the historicity of Jesus Christ as well as His divinity.
Mike
[1] Because of those I know of, several are clearly mythical, and some certainly did not 'ascend into heaven'. [The reply-to address is valid for 30 days from this posting] -- Michael J Davis http://www.trustsof.demon.co.uk <>< For this is what the Lord has said to me, "Go and post a Watchman and let him report what he sees." Isa 21:6 <><
> In message > <e3dc26bc-3047-474e-8354-02e53890c...@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, > Giles <g_har...@yahoo.co.uk> writes
> >27 stumbling blocks for this atheist in accepting the Christian belief > >that Jesus was God and ascended to heaven: "The following world > >saviors and "sons of God," were crucified or executed and were > >resurrected from the dead and ascended to heaven. They predate the so- > >called Jesus Christ."http://www.destee.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41935
> >1. Adad of Assyria > >2. Adonis, Apollo, Heracles ("Hercules") and Zeus of Greece > >3. Alcides of Thebes > >4. Attis of Phrygia > >5. Baal of Phoenicia > >6. Bali of Afghanistan > >7. Beddru of Japan > >8. Buddha of India > >9. Crite of Chaldea > >10. Deva Tat of Siam > >11. Hesus of the Druids > >11. Horus, Osiris, and Serapis of Egypt, whose long-haired, bearded > >appearance was adopted for the Christ character > >12. Indra of Tibet/India > >13. Jao of Nepal > >14. Krishna of India > >15. Mikado of the Sintoos > >16. Mithra of Persia > >17. Odin of the Scandinavians > >18. Prometheus of Caucasus/Greece > >19. Quetzalcoatl of Mexico > >20. Salivahana of Bermuda > >21. Tammuz of Syria (who was, in a typical mythmaking move, later > >turned into the disciple Thomas > >22. Thor of the Gauls > >23. Universal Monarch of the Sibyls > >24. Wittoba of the Bilingonese > >25. Xamolxis of Thrace > >26. Zarathustra/Zoroaster of Persia > >27. Zoar of the Bonz > >_______________________________ > >If people are told in their religion that their god ascended into > >heaven it seems that this is said as a sort of clincher. "If you're > >still in doubt, let me tell you our god ascended into heaven. > >Satisfied?"
> Giles, methinks you are trying to justify your position too hard. Tell > me, did you find this on the Internet, or did you examine them all > yourself? [1]
> Since 'gods' are usually regarded as 'living in heaven' your list seems > a little tautological.
> The importance to Christians is the historicity of Jesus Christ as well > as His divinity.
> Mike
You believe Jesus is the one true God. The rest are fakes/false gods. Any similarity between the old false gods and Jesus is just "diabolical mimicry." Satan used "plagiarism by anticipation." http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa1.htm
Richard Corfield wrote: > On 2008-03-25, Giles <g_har...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >> The trouble is Jesus did not realise that 2,000 years later any >> attempt to recreate this bodily ascension in a film was bound to lead >> to mirth, and so a very important bit of the Easter story has to be >> left out.
> I couldn't imagine how I'd approach it. Ages ago doing it on wires would > be fine, and in fact would still work well on stage, but even with > super-dooper-3D-CGI-everythings we're just too used to this kind of > effect now. It's not often new effect types come up, and then they > become cliche. Consider the Matrix Time effect, or the Jaws Camera Zoom > effect.
I would do it from the point of view of Jesus, seeing the earth recede and then the solar system, then the galaxies etc, as the credits roll.
>On Apr 2, 12:48 pm, Michael J Davis <?...@trustsof.demon.co.uk> wrote: >> In message >> <e3dc26bc-3047-474e-8354-02e53890c...@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, >> Giles <g_har...@yahoo.co.uk> writes
>> >27 stumbling blocks for this atheist in accepting the Christian belief >> >that Jesus was God and ascended to heaven: "The following world >> >saviors and "sons of God," were crucified or executed and were >> >resurrected from the dead and ascended to heaven. They predate the so- >> >called Jesus Christ."http://www.destee.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41935
>> >1. Adad of Assyria >> >2. Adonis, Apollo, Heracles ("Hercules") and Zeus of Greece >> >3. Alcides of Thebes >> >4. Attis of Phrygia >> >5. Baal of Phoenicia >> >6. Bali of Afghanistan >> >7. Beddru of Japan >> >8. Buddha of India >> >9. Crite of Chaldea >> >10. Deva Tat of Siam >> >11. Hesus of the Druids >> >11. Horus, Osiris, and Serapis of Egypt, whose long-haired, bearded >> >appearance was adopted for the Christ character >> >12. Indra of Tibet/India >> >13. Jao of Nepal >> >14. Krishna of India >> >15. Mikado of the Sintoos >> >16. Mithra of Persia >> >17. Odin of the Scandinavians >> >18. Prometheus of Caucasus/Greece >> >19. Quetzalcoatl of Mexico >> >20. Salivahana of Bermuda >> >21. Tammuz of Syria (who was, in a typical mythmaking move, later >> >turned into the disciple Thomas >> >22. Thor of the Gauls >> >23. Universal Monarch of the Sibyls >> >24. Wittoba of the Bilingonese >> >25. Xamolxis of Thrace >> >26. Zarathustra/Zoroaster of Persia >> >27. Zoar of the Bonz >> >_______________________________ >> >If people are told in their religion that their god ascended into >> >heaven it seems that this is said as a sort of clincher. "If you're >> >still in doubt, let me tell you our god ascended into heaven. >> >Satisfied?"
>> Giles, methinks you are trying to justify your position too hard. Tell >> me, did you find this on the Internet, or did you examine them all >> yourself? [1]
>> Since 'gods' are usually regarded as 'living in heaven' your list seems >> a little tautological.
>> The importance to Christians is the historicity of Jesus Christ as well >> as His divinity.
>You believe Jesus is the one true God. The rest are fakes/false gods. >Any similarity between the old false gods and Jesus is just >"diabolical mimicry." Satan used "plagiarism by anticipation." >http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa1.htm
It may surprise you that I think that some of the stories are NOT diabolical, but may be of true divine origin.
Just as a true prophet may unwittingly fore-tell events that haven't yet happened, so it may be that some of these 'myths' are anticipating the truth of what was yet to come. (CS Lewis believed something similar.)
However, against that, you are making a lot of fuss about the 'Ascension' - in fact Christians see the three major events that have significance as the death of Jesus, His Resurrection, and the descent of the Holy Spirit upon the disciples (Pentecost). Frankly, the Ascension is only Jesus' way of saying good-bye; there's no big significance in it. (After all he promised to be with us until the end of time.)
Mike
[The reply-to address is valid for 30 days from this posting] -- Michael J Davis http://www.trustsof.demon.co.uk <>< For this is what the Lord has said to me, "Go and post a Watchman and let him report what he sees." Isa 21:6 <><
> .. Frankly, the Ascension > is only Jesus' way of saying good-bye; there's no big significance in > it. (After all he promised to be with us until the end of time.)
"Nevertheless I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Counselor will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you."
> Richard Corfield wrote: >> On 2008-03-25, Giles <g_har...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >>> The trouble is Jesus did not realise that 2,000 years later any >>> attempt to recreate this bodily ascension in a film was bound to lead >>> to mirth, and so a very important bit of the Easter story has to be >>> left out.
>> I couldn't imagine how I'd approach it. Ages ago doing it on wires would >> be fine, and in fact would still work well on stage, but even with >> super-dooper-3D-CGI-everythings we're just too used to this kind of >> effect now. It's not often new effect types come up, and then they >> become cliche. Consider the Matrix Time effect, or the Jaws Camera Zoom >> effect.
> I would do it from the point of view of Jesus, seeing the earth recede and > then the solar system, then the galaxies etc, as the credits roll.
> -- > Paul
Sounds like the start of "A Matter of Life and Death", but in reverse. Steve Hague
In message <MPG.225d73c8ac987402989...@News.Individual.Net>, Tom Higgins <tom.higg...@2ndplace.co.uk> writes
>[Michael Davis said..] >> .. Frankly, the Ascension >> is only Jesus' way of saying good-bye; there's no big significance in >> it. (After all he promised to be with us until the end of time.)
>"Nevertheless I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I >go away, for if I do not go away, the Counselor will not come to >you; but if I go, I will send him to you."
Yes, thanks! I wasn't giving the whole story for this comment.
Mike [The reply-to address is valid for 30 days from this posting] -- Michael J Davis http://www.trustsof.demon.co.uk <>< For this is what the Lord has said to me, "Go and post a Watchman and let him report what he sees." Isa 21:6 <><
>Richard Corfield wrote: >> On 2008-03-25, Giles <g_har...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >>> The trouble is Jesus did not realise that 2,000 years later any >>> attempt to recreate this bodily ascension in a film was bound to lead >>> to mirth, and so a very important bit of the Easter story has to be >>> left out.
>> I couldn't imagine how I'd approach it. Ages ago doing it on wires would >> be fine, and in fact would still work well on stage, but even with >> super-dooper-3D-CGI-everythings we're just too used to this kind of >> effect now. It's not often new effect types come up, and then they >> become cliche. Consider the Matrix Time effect, or the Jaws Camera Zoom >> effect.
>I would do it from the point of view of Jesus, seeing the earth recede >and then the solar system, then the galaxies etc, as the credits roll.
A bit like the ending to Men In Black, then.
Mark -- Pointless waffle (again) at http://mark.x.tc "Shake off your golden shackles, children of time no more"
On 2008-04-02, Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
> A bit like the ending to Men In Black, then.
You can reuse the footage!
- Richard
-- _/_/_/ _/_/_/ _/_/_/ Richard Corfield <Richard.Corfi...@gmail.com> _/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/ _/ _/ Time is a one way street, _/ _/ _/_/ _/_/_/ except in the Twilight Zone
>27 stumbling blocks for this atheist in accepting the Christian belief >that Jesus was God and ascended to heaven: "The following world >saviors and "sons of God," were crucified or executed and were >resurrected from the dead and ascended to heaven. They predate the so- >called Jesus Christ." http://www.destee.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41935
>1. Adad of Assyria >2. Adonis, Apollo, Heracles ("Hercules") and Zeus of Greece >3. Alcides of Thebes >4. Attis of Phrygia >5. Baal of Phoenicia >6. Bali of Afghanistan >7. Beddru of Japan >8. Buddha of India >9. Crite of Chaldea >10. Deva Tat of Siam >11. Hesus of the Druids >11. Horus, Osiris, and Serapis of Egypt, whose long-haired, bearded >appearance was adopted for the Christ character >12. Indra of Tibet/India >13. Jao of Nepal >14. Krishna of India >15. Mikado of the Sintoos >16. Mithra of Persia >17. Odin of the Scandinavians >18. Prometheus of Caucasus/Greece >19. Quetzalcoatl of Mexico >20. Salivahana of Bermuda >21. Tammuz of Syria (who was, in a typical mythmaking move, later >turned into the disciple Thomas >22. Thor of the Gauls >23. Universal Monarch of the Sibyls >24. Wittoba of the Bilingonese >25. Xamolxis of Thrace >26. Zarathustra/Zoroaster of Persia >27. Zoar of the Bonz >_______________________________ >If people are told in their religion that their god ascended into >heaven it seems that this is said as a sort of clincher. "If you're >still in doubt, let me tell you our god ascended into heaven. >Satisfied?"
I've never heard the Ascension used in that way. You must move in some very strange circles.
The fact that an idea of ascension is very widespread[1] just means that it's obvious as a way of getting the hero to his reward. So?
[1] I'm trusting that your list is correct. Can you give me some evidence for (say) your first no. 11?
> >27 stumbling blocks for this atheist in accepting the Christian belief > >that Jesus was God and ascended to heaven: "The following world > >saviors and "sons of God," were crucified or executed and were > >resurrected from the dead and ascended to heaven. They predate the so- > >called Jesus Christ."http://www.destee.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41935
> >1. Adad of Assyria > >2. Adonis, Apollo, Heracles ("Hercules") and Zeus of Greece > >3. Alcides of Thebes > >4. Attis of Phrygia > >5. Baal of Phoenicia > >6. Bali of Afghanistan > >7. Beddru of Japan > >8. Buddha of India > >9. Crite of Chaldea > >10. Deva Tat of Siam > >11. Hesus of the Druids > >11. Horus, Osiris, and Serapis of Egypt, whose long-haired, bearded > >appearance was adopted for the Christ character > >12. Indra of Tibet/India > >13. Jao of Nepal > >14. Krishna of India > >15. Mikado of the Sintoos > >16. Mithra of Persia > >17. Odin of the Scandinavians > >18. Prometheus of Caucasus/Greece > >19. Quetzalcoatl of Mexico > >20. Salivahana of Bermuda > >21. Tammuz of Syria (who was, in a typical mythmaking move, later > >turned into the disciple Thomas > >22. Thor of the Gauls > >23. Universal Monarch of the Sibyls > >24. Wittoba of the Bilingonese > >25. Xamolxis of Thrace > >26. Zarathustra/Zoroaster of Persia > >27. Zoar of the Bonz > >_______________________________ > >If people are told in their religion that their god ascended into > >heaven it seems that this is said as a sort of clincher. "If you're > >still in doubt, let me tell you our god ascended into heaven. > >Satisfied?"
> I've never heard the Ascension used in that way. You must move in some > very strange circles.
> The fact that an idea of ascension is very widespread[1] just means > that it's obvious as a way of getting the hero to his reward. So?
> [1] I'm trusting that your list is correct. Can you give me some > evidence for (say) your first no. 11?
I offer no evidence that any of them were godmen.
Can you give me some evidence that your godman was really a god, other than evidence in the form of assertions made by his followers?
Could you explain to me why such a list isn't very troubling to an intelligent believer? Did you already have faith in your particular godman, before you ever heard of (mythical) godmen, with very similar cvs, that were worshipped before yours lived?
> In message > <5cb0645e-df67-4499-b1bd-6c542e1ab...@u36g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, > Giles <g_har...@yahoo.co.uk> writes
> >On Apr 2, 12:48 pm, Michael J Davis <?...@trustsof.demon.co.uk> wrote: > >> In message > >> <e3dc26bc-3047-474e-8354-02e53890c...@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, > >> Giles <g_har...@yahoo.co.uk> writes
> >> >27 stumbling blocks for this atheist in accepting the Christian belief > >> >that Jesus was God and ascended to heaven: "The following world > >> >saviors and "sons of God," were crucified or executed and were > >> >resurrected from the dead and ascended to heaven. They predate the so- > >> >called Jesus Christ."http://www.destee.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41935
> >> >1. Adad of Assyria > >> >2. Adonis, Apollo, Heracles ("Hercules") and Zeus of Greece > >> >3. Alcides of Thebes > >> >4. Attis of Phrygia > >> >5. Baal of Phoenicia > >> >6. Bali of Afghanistan > >> >7. Beddru of Japan > >> >8. Buddha of India > >> >9. Crite of Chaldea > >> >10. Deva Tat of Siam > >> >11. Hesus of the Druids > >> >11. Horus, Osiris, and Serapis of Egypt, whose long-haired, bearded > >> >appearance was adopted for the Christ character > >> >12. Indra of Tibet/India > >> >13. Jao of Nepal > >> >14. Krishna of India > >> >15. Mikado of the Sintoos > >> >16. Mithra of Persia > >> >17. Odin of the Scandinavians > >> >18. Prometheus of Caucasus/Greece > >> >19. Quetzalcoatl of Mexico > >> >20. Salivahana of Bermuda > >> >21. Tammuz of Syria (who was, in a typical mythmaking move, later > >> >turned into the disciple Thomas > >> >22. Thor of the Gauls > >> >23. Universal Monarch of the Sibyls > >> >24. Wittoba of the Bilingonese > >> >25. Xamolxis of Thrace > >> >26. Zarathustra/Zoroaster of Persia > >> >27. Zoar of the Bonz > >> >_______________________________ > >> >If people are told in their religion that their god ascended into > >> >heaven it seems that this is said as a sort of clincher. "If you're > >> >still in doubt, let me tell you our god ascended into heaven. > >> >Satisfied?"
> >> Giles, methinks you are trying to justify your position too hard. Tell > >> me, did you find this on the Internet, or did you examine them all > >> yourself? [1]
> >> Since 'gods' are usually regarded as 'living in heaven' your list seems > >> a little tautological.
> >> The importance to Christians is the historicity of Jesus Christ as well > >> as His divinity.
> >You believe Jesus is the one true God. The rest are fakes/false gods. > >Any similarity between the old false gods and Jesus is just > >"diabolical mimicry." Satan used "plagiarism by anticipation." > >http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa1.htm
> It may surprise you that I think that some of the stories are NOT > diabolical, but may be of true divine origin.
That's blasphemy to many no doubt.
Jesus says in the bible that his parables are intended to deceive and confuse some people. Maybe you're onto something.
God gets people to believe in false godmen to prepare later generations for the real godman. Mmm.
> Just as a true prophet may unwittingly fore-tell events that haven't yet > happened, so it may be that some of these 'myths' are anticipating the > truth of what was yet to come. (CS Lewis believed something similar.)
I can't think of a better way to make people back in the Bronze Age sceptical as to the bona fides of each godman that came into their midst. "Not another godman! We had one in here only last week!"
Perhaps Jesus is a myth that prepares people for the true godman yet to come.
> However, against that, you are making a lot of fuss about the > 'Ascension' - in fact Christians see the three major events that have > significance as the death of Jesus, His Resurrection, and the descent of > the Holy Spirit upon the disciples (Pentecost). Frankly, the Ascension > is only Jesus' way of saying good-bye; there's no big significance in > it. (After all he promised to be with us until the end of time.)
> Mike
> [The reply-to address is valid for 30 days from this posting] > -- > Michael J Davishttp://www.trustsof.demon.co.uk > <>< > For this is what the Lord has said to me, > "Go and post a Watchman and let > him report what he sees." Isa 21:6 > <><
>On Apr 2, 6:20 pm, Michael J Davis <?...@trustsof.demon.co.uk> wrote: >> In message >> <5cb0645e-df67-4499-b1bd-6c542e1ab...@u36g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, >> Giles <g_har...@yahoo.co.uk> writes
>> >On Apr 2, 12:48 pm, Michael J Davis <?...@trustsof.demon.co.uk> wrote: >> >> In message >> >> <e3dc26bc-3047-474e-8354-02e53890c...@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, >> >> Giles <g_har...@yahoo.co.uk> writes
>> >> >27 stumbling blocks for this atheist in accepting the Christian belief >> >> >that Jesus was God and ascended to heaven: "The following world >> >> >saviors and "sons of God," were crucified or executed and were >> >> >resurrected from the dead and ascended to heaven. They predate the so- >> >> >called Jesus Christ."http://www.destee.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41935
>> >> >1. Adad of Assyria >> >> >2. Adonis, Apollo, Heracles ("Hercules") and Zeus of Greece >> >> >3. Alcides of Thebes >> >> >4. Attis of Phrygia >> >> >5. Baal of Phoenicia >> >> >6. Bali of Afghanistan >> >> >7. Beddru of Japan >> >> >8. Buddha of India >> >> >9. Crite of Chaldea >> >> >10. Deva Tat of Siam >> >> >11. Hesus of the Druids >> >> >11. Horus, Osiris, and Serapis of Egypt, whose long-haired, bearded >> >> >appearance was adopted for the Christ character >> >> >12. Indra of Tibet/India >> >> >13. Jao of Nepal >> >> >14. Krishna of India >> >> >15. Mikado of the Sintoos >> >> >16. Mithra of Persia >> >> >17. Odin of the Scandinavians >> >> >18. Prometheus of Caucasus/Greece >> >> >19. Quetzalcoatl of Mexico >> >> >20. Salivahana of Bermuda >> >> >21. Tammuz of Syria (who was, in a typical mythmaking move, later >> >> >turned into the disciple Thomas >> >> >22. Thor of the Gauls >> >> >23. Universal Monarch of the Sibyls >> >> >24. Wittoba of the Bilingonese >> >> >25. Xamolxis of Thrace >> >> >26. Zarathustra/Zoroaster of Persia >> >> >27. Zoar of the Bonz >> >> >_______________________________ >> >> >If people are told in their religion that their god ascended into >> >> >heaven it seems that this is said as a sort of clincher. "If you're >> >> >still in doubt, let me tell you our god ascended into heaven. >> >> >Satisfied?"
>> >> Giles, methinks you are trying to justify your position too hard. Tell >> >> me, did you find this on the Internet, or did you examine them all >> >> yourself? [1]
>> >> Since 'gods' are usually regarded as 'living in heaven' your list seems >> >> a little tautological.
>> >> The importance to Christians is the historicity of Jesus Christ as well >> >> as His divinity.
>> >You believe Jesus is the one true God. The rest are fakes/false gods. >> >Any similarity between the old false gods and Jesus is just >> >"diabolical mimicry." Satan used "plagiarism by anticipation." >> >http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa1.htm
>> It may surprise you that I think that some of the stories are NOT >> diabolical, but may be of true divine origin.
>That's blasphemy to many no doubt.
I'm sure it may be.
>Jesus says in the bible that his parables are intended to deceive and >confuse some people. Maybe you're onto something.
Quote please?
>God gets people to believe in false godmen to prepare later >generations for the real godman. Mmm.
No, I didn't say that. I just said that some people may get glimpses of the truth. However, glimpses of the truth may often mislead. We need the whole truth.
>> Just as a true prophet may unwittingly fore-tell events that haven't yet >> happened, so it may be that some of these 'myths' are anticipating the >> truth of what was yet to come. (CS Lewis believed something similar.)
>I can't think of a better way to make people back in the Bronze Age >sceptical as to the bona fides of each godman that came into their >midst. "Not another godman! We had one in here only last week!"
>Perhaps Jesus is a myth that prepares people for the true godman yet >to come.
I said before that Jesus is no myth, but the reality. You may wish to refer to John 14:6-7 & John 15:26.
I note that you haven't answered truthfully whether these stories are your own research, or whether you found a mish mash on the Internet.
Mike
[The reply-to address is valid for 30 days from this posting] -- Michael J Davis http://www.trustsof.demon.co.uk <>< For this is what the Lord has said to me, "Go and post a Watchman and let him report what he sees." Isa 21:6 <><
>> [1] I'm trusting that your list is correct. Can you give me some >> evidence for (say) your first no. 11?
>I offer no evidence that any of them were godmen.
I'm not asking for proof that Hesus ascended to heaven, I'm asking for evidence that there was ever such a belief. You have it to hand, of course.
>Can you give me some evidence that your godman was really a god, other >than evidence in the form of assertions made by his followers?
Nope. Are you ready to answer my question?
>Could you explain to me why such a list isn't very troubling to an >intelligent believer?
1) I have no evidence that anyone ever believed these things. 2) the fact that a true God-man would ascend to heaven at the end of his earthly mission is a good reason for expecting fictional god-men to do the same. I notice that, in many fictional accounts of war, people die. This doesn't mean that we should mistrust supposed true accounts where people also die.
>Did you already have faith in your particular >godman, before you ever heard of (mythical) godmen, with very similar >cvs, that were worshipped before yours lived?
No, I first heard of Esus from reading The White Goddess, at a time when I wasn't a Christian.
From a brief glance, I'd say that the parallels are artificially enhanced. For example, the number 'three' is never mentioned in the Bible in relation to the visiting wise men; and the use of the word 'angels' to describe the annunciation of the birth of Horus is surprising - what is meant by 'angel' in the context of Egyptian religion? You obviously know the answer to this - perhaps you'd care to shareyour understanding with us.
Neither is the birth of Jesus in the bible dated to the winter solstice. I think it's widely agreed that the date of Christmas derives either from an existing pagan celebration or from the same human impulse that gave rise to pagan solstice events.
None of this causes me any more trouble than the last time some atheist tried to use it to persuade me that Christianity was just another myth. You might do better to take one example and argue it in depth than to use a scatter-gun approach.
From a brief glance, I'd say that the parallels are artificially
>enhanced. For example, the number 'three' is never mentioned in the >Bible in relation to the visiting wise men; and the use of the word >'angels' to describe the annunciation of the birth of Horus is >surprising - what is meant by 'angel' in the context of Egyptian >religion? You obviously know the answer to this - perhaps you'd care >to shareyour understanding with us.
>Neither is the birth of Jesus in the bible dated to the winter >solstice. I think it's widely agreed that the date of Christmas >derives either from an existing pagan celebration or from the same >human impulse that gave rise to pagan solstice events.
Oh, and his comment about Bethany being 'Beth-anu' because "u and y were interchangeable in antiquity" is astonishingly stupid. By 'in antiquity' he presumably means 'in transliterating words from Greek into Roman letters' - which happens even today. But the Greek for 'Bethany' isn't 'Bethanu' it's 'Bethania'. That took me 13 seconds to find out, including the time it took to fire up my browser.
Rather than relying on other people's idiotic and error-ridden web pages, why not research and argue your own case?
>in order to understand exactly /how/ enhanced these kind of >Hours/Jesus claims are.
Thanks, Tom.
Mike [The reply-to address is valid for 30 days from this posting] -- Michael J Davis http://www.trustsof.demon.co.uk <>< For this is what the Lord has said to me, "Go and post a Watchman and let him report what he sees." Isa 21:6 <><
Michael J Davis <?...@trustsof.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >God gets people to believe in false godmen to prepare later > >generations for the real godman. Mmm.
> No, I didn't say that. I just said that some people may get glimpses of > the truth. However, glimpses of the truth may often mislead. We need the > whole truth.
So on what basis do you reject that Mohammed, or Josef Smith had fuller truths than Jesus. Both traditions venerate Jesus and his teachings. Using your logic surely those traditions must be taken seriously?
Peter -- Add my middle initial to email me. It has become attached to a country www.the-brights.net
On 1 Apr, 14:54, Giles <g_har...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> 27 stumbling blocks for this atheist in accepting the Christian belief > that Jesus was God and ascended to heaven: "The following world > saviors and "sons of God," were crucified or executed and were > resurrected from the dead and ascended to heaven. They predate the so- > called Jesus Christ."http://www.destee.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41935
> 1. Adad of Assyria > 2. Adonis, Apollo, Heracles ("Hercules") and Zeus of Greece > 3. Alcides of Thebes > 4. Attis of Phrygia > 5. Baal of Phoenicia > 6. Bali of Afghanistan > 7. Beddru of Japan > 8. Buddha of India > 9. Crite of Chaldea > 10. Deva Tat of Siam > 11. Hesus of the Druids > 11. Horus, Osiris, and Serapis of Egypt, whose long-haired, bearded > appearance was adopted for the Christ character > 12. Indra of Tibet/India > 13. Jao of Nepal > 14. Krishna of India > 15. Mikado of the Sintoos > 16.Mithraof Persia > 17. Odin of the Scandinavians > 18. Prometheus of Caucasus/Greece > 19. Quetzalcoatl of Mexico > 20. Salivahana of Bermuda > 21. Tammuz of Syria (who was, in a typical mythmaking move, later > turned into the disciple Thomas > 22. Thor of the Gauls > 23. Universal Monarch of the Sibyls > 24. Wittoba of the Bilingonese > 25. Xamolxis of Thrace > 26. Zarathustra/Zoroaster of Persia > 27. Zoar of the Bonz > Satisfied?"
Not really. Why on earth didn't you verify this lie before posting it?
Provide detailed references to the ancient sources for each of your claims above.
Here's a list of all the ancient literary sources for Mithras. There are no others. Produce the one that backs up the list above:
One of the problems that I have with atheists is their tendency to repeat unchecked any old falsehood if it seems convenient. How else could such a list as above come into existence?
On Apr 3, 5:04 pm, Michael J Davis <?...@trustsof.demon.co.uk>
> >> It may surprise you that I think that some of the stories are NOT > >> diabolical, but may be of true divine origin.
> >That's blasphemy to many no doubt.
> I'm sure it may be.
> >Jesus says in the bible that his parables are intended to deceive and > >confuse some people. Maybe you're onto something.
> Quote please?
I'm thinking of Mark 4:12 That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.
Are you going to tell me that is all a misunderstanding due to a mistranslation or something?
> >God gets people to believe in false godmen to prepare later > >generations for the real godman. Mmm.
> No, I didn't say that. I just said that some people may get glimpses of > the truth. However, glimpses of the truth may often mislead. We need the > whole truth.
But it's not just that scholars are saying these godmen spouted similar things to Jesus, but that these godmen were said to have experienced big events in their lives shared with the (later) Jesus.
If an alleged godman (before Jesus) was believed to have come back from the dead, etc, etc, that's not a prophecy with a "glimpse of the truth," is it? It's someone beating Jesus to parts of Jesus's life.
> >> Just as a true prophet may unwittingly fore-tell events that haven't yet > >> happened, so it may be that some of these 'myths' are anticipating the > >> truth of what was yet to come. (CS Lewis believed something similar.)
> >I can't think of a better way to make people back in the Bronze Age > >sceptical as to the bona fides of each godman that came into their > >midst. "Not another godman! We had one in here only last week!"
> >Perhaps Jesus is a myth that prepares people for the true godman yet > >to come.
> I said before that Jesus is no myth, but the reality. You may wish to > refer to John 14:6-7 & John 15:26.
> I note that you haven't answered truthfully whether these stories are > your own research, or whether you found a mish mash on the Internet.
> Mike
I'm not hiding a lack of research. Why should I take time out to research it, unless you count just doing some reading as research? I prefer to look at what is probable rather than waste time checking out the bona fides of every godman. Why should I check to see whether a particular godman myth existed, and if it existed, how many people believed it and for how long. I prefer to look at what is probable. On balance it is highly probable that none of the godmen, including Jesus, were really godmen.
> >> [1] I'm trusting that your list is correct. Can you give me some > >> evidence for (say) your first no. 11?
> >I offer no evidence that any of them were godmen.
> I'm not asking for proof that Hesus ascended to heaven, I'm asking for > evidence that there was ever such a belief. You have it to hand, of > course.
Why should I go through them one by one? If you want to believe it's all a great conspiracy got up by some atheists and there were NO godmen, with similar life events to Jesus, worshipped before the time of Jesus, that's up to you.
> >Can you give me some evidence that your godman was really a god, other > >than evidence in the form of assertions made by his followers?
> Nope. Are you ready to answer my question?
> >Could you explain to me why such a list isn't very troubling to an > >intelligent believer?
> 1) I have no evidence that anyone ever believed these things.
Are you saying that people had these myths but knew they were myths? If that is true, they were more advanced than today's Christians.
You can't go back in time and go into people's heads. Bearing in mind Christians believe some pretty tall stories today, it's reasonable to suppose people were at least equally credulous several thousand years ago.
> 2) the fact that a true God-man would ascend to heaven at the end of > his earthly mission is a good reason for expecting fictional god-men > to do the same.
Yes, but the thing is the "fictional god-men" who ascended came before your supposed true godman. So it's reasonable to expect your godman (one of the last) to ascend like all the godmen who came before him.
>I notice that, in many fictional accounts of war, > people die. This doesn't mean that we should mistrust supposed true > accounts where people also die.
> >Did you already have faith in your particular > >godman, before you ever heard of (mythical) godmen, with very similar > >cvs, that were worshipped before yours lived?
> No, I first heard of Esus from reading The White Goddess, at a time > when I wasn't a Christian.
> From a brief glance, I'd say that the parallels are artificially > enhanced. For example, the number 'three' is never mentioned in the > Bible in relation to the visiting wise men; and the use of the word > 'angels' to describe the annunciation of the birth of Horus is > surprising - what is meant by 'angel' in the context of Egyptian > religion? You obviously know the answer to this - perhaps you'd care > to shareyour understanding with us.
> Neither is the birth of Jesus in the bible dated to the winter > solstice. I think it's widely agreed that the date of Christmas > derives either from an existing pagan celebration or from the same > human impulse that gave rise to pagan solstice events.
> None of this causes me any more trouble than the last time some > atheist tried to use it to persuade me that Christianity was just > another myth. You might do better to take one example and argue it in > depth than to use a scatter-gun approach.
Do you really think there are atheist writers out there who need to deliberately make up stuff about Jesus's pagan origins? An atheist doesn't need to do that to convince himself there isn't a god.
|
