Okay, let me say it this way then: I don't have access to the materials he used, how do I know their references are trustworthy? How do I know that those books didn't misinterpret or skew facts to make their points? That is why it's bad to reference other compilations, specifically biased compilations. When I said before they didn't use historical documents, I didn't mean papyrus scripts, I meant credible mythologists who have an unbiased interpretation of documents relating to those religions. On that whole list, I did not see one source that met that criteria.
lol, everyone of those sources is an anti-religious or anti-Christian source. It's hard to believe a source when the author is already biased. It'd be easier to swallow if the sources were historical documents rather than someone else's compilation of anti-religious work.
Because, and just bear with me, imagine that the Bible was written with a mataphorical creation introduction, but (and this is where it gets CRAZY) the rest of it is actual events! *gasp* I know, it's really hard to imagine, seeing as how there isn't a real nation named Israel and none of the events in the Bible can be traced to actual historical events and nothing in the New Testament is recorded in actual Jewish historical documents. Oh wait......they can and are.
As of yet, I haven't found any real reference that says Horus died and rose again in 3 days, had 12 disciples or any of the claims made in the video other than the video itself.
And if you really think that the piercing of Jesus hand's was not literal, you don't know what crucifiction is. Go search for some documents by the Jewish historian Josephus to find out more about that. Jesus is even documented in his recordings and he wasn't a christian.
Deeds are important only because they edify others and bring glory to God. If a person has been saved through faith, but then goes out and is living like they want, they obviously weren't serious about their faith. And to claim to be a Christian while living that way just drags the name of God in the mud.
How does that video discount Jesus as being the true son of God? Were the other 'sons of god' actual people or just mythological figures, because there are actual historical accounts of Jesus. Even with all the similarities, it still doesn't disprove Jesus' Godship. I will admit it's an extremely interesting video, and I would love to go to the site and check out their references, but it's blocked here at work (as are most sites). However, just because others came before Jesus with similiar characteristics doesn't disprove that Jesus was the real Son of God. Of course I cannot prove he was either, this is where my faith comes into play. My first thought on the video was that a lot of miracles or parables in the Bible were done in such a way that people would be familiar with them. If so many cultures had already seen 'messiahs' come and go with similiar characteristics, having the true messiah come in similiar fashion would serve as a kind of advertisement from God that said 'Look, here comes the true Messiah' and people would see the signs and recognize their significance. In fact, the entire astronomical explanation (if it is all true) only serves to strengthen my faith that the universe was designed in such a way as to announce how the Messiah would come. That makes just as much sense as saying that all these religions just happen to notice the same heavenly phenomenon and incorporate them into the same spiritual figure.
The biggest part of my faith is in my relationship with Christ. I don't know if you can have a relationship with a person who does not exist (I suppose you could do a case study with someone who is crazy and thinks they have an imaginary friend). But I take unbelievable comfort in knowing that even if I had no one left, I would still have God. Even when I am at my lowest, I can go to God in prayer and the worry on my heart literally melts away and I can be at peace. In the last 6 years of my life, I have gone from a life filled with worry to being worry free, even though my life still involves the same trouble as it always has. That is why I said earlier I really don't like to bother arguing about Christianity because either you believe it or you don't. I can't make anyone believe but if a person decides to take the initiative to enter into a relationship with Christ (a real initiative), I believe they will find that He is real; not like any god or spiritual figure that has existed since the beginning of our created/evoluted time.
The things in the Bible that are up for debate are, more likely than not, sidepoints. The key to the Bible (well, the Christian Bible w/ New Testament) is the fact that We are sinners, Jesus died for us, believe in Jesus to receive forgiveness for sin in lieu of His payment. To me, that is the most important part. I can read the Bible and learn new insightful things that may or may not be affected by my interpretation, but that core point will never change, at least not for me. I'm not a good person to argue with about the Bible because I honestly am not that concerned about arguing my point with other people. I stopped trying to *make* people believe in the Bible when I realized I don't have that power.
Not really, I don't have 100% of the Bible memorized, but I've read through it an nothing jumped out at me as being a contradiction. Where and what in the Bible says everything is the exact same as it was when it was first created?
I'm of the same mind as you. I have a deep rooted faith in God and the Bible, but I can accept evolution. I think the problem with many people is that they hear the word evolution and equate it with 'God doesn't exist'. I've always believed that evolution fits well within a created universe. In fact, it is only *natural* that things would evolve given the design of things. I will agree that most people who are uneducated on evolution are the ones who dispute it being taught in school. And while I don't believe that we *evolved* from apes, I can see where species can evolve in order to adapt to certain environments (dinos to birds maybe?).
Slashdot Mirror
Okay, let me say it this way then: I don't have access to the materials he used, how do I know their references are trustworthy? How do I know that those books didn't misinterpret or skew facts to make their points? That is why it's bad to reference other compilations, specifically biased compilations. When I said before they didn't use historical documents, I didn't mean papyrus scripts, I meant credible mythologists who have an unbiased interpretation of documents relating to those religions. On that whole list, I did not see one source that met that criteria.
Um, because the definition of anti-x is pretty much something that opposes 'x'.
lol, everyone of those sources is an anti-religious or anti-Christian source. It's hard to believe a source when the author is already biased. It'd be easier to swallow if the sources were historical documents rather than someone else's compilation of anti-religious work.
Because, and just bear with me, imagine that the Bible was written with a mataphorical creation introduction, but (and this is where it gets CRAZY) the rest of it is actual events! *gasp* I know, it's really hard to imagine, seeing as how there isn't a real nation named Israel and none of the events in the Bible can be traced to actual historical events and nothing in the New Testament is recorded in actual Jewish historical documents. Oh wait......they can and are.
As of yet, I haven't found any real reference that says Horus died and rose again in 3 days, had 12 disciples or any of the claims made in the video other than the video itself.
And if you really think that the piercing of Jesus hand's was not literal, you don't know what crucifiction is. Go search for some documents by the Jewish historian Josephus to find out more about that. Jesus is even documented in his recordings and he wasn't a christian.
Deeds are important only because they edify others and bring glory to God. If a person has been saved through faith, but then goes out and is living like they want, they obviously weren't serious about their faith. And to claim to be a Christian while living that way just drags the name of God in the mud.
How does that video discount Jesus as being the true son of God? Were the other 'sons of god' actual people or just mythological figures, because there are actual historical accounts of Jesus. Even with all the similarities, it still doesn't disprove Jesus' Godship. I will admit it's an extremely interesting video, and I would love to go to the site and check out their references, but it's blocked here at work (as are most sites). However, just because others came before Jesus with similiar characteristics doesn't disprove that Jesus was the real Son of God. Of course I cannot prove he was either, this is where my faith comes into play. My first thought on the video was that a lot of miracles or parables in the Bible were done in such a way that people would be familiar with them. If so many cultures had already seen 'messiahs' come and go with similiar characteristics, having the true messiah come in similiar fashion would serve as a kind of advertisement from God that said 'Look, here comes the true Messiah' and people would see the signs and recognize their significance. In fact, the entire astronomical explanation (if it is all true) only serves to strengthen my faith that the universe was designed in such a way as to announce how the Messiah would come. That makes just as much sense as saying that all these religions just happen to notice the same heavenly phenomenon and incorporate them into the same spiritual figure. The biggest part of my faith is in my relationship with Christ. I don't know if you can have a relationship with a person who does not exist (I suppose you could do a case study with someone who is crazy and thinks they have an imaginary friend). But I take unbelievable comfort in knowing that even if I had no one left, I would still have God. Even when I am at my lowest, I can go to God in prayer and the worry on my heart literally melts away and I can be at peace. In the last 6 years of my life, I have gone from a life filled with worry to being worry free, even though my life still involves the same trouble as it always has. That is why I said earlier I really don't like to bother arguing about Christianity because either you believe it or you don't. I can't make anyone believe but if a person decides to take the initiative to enter into a relationship with Christ (a real initiative), I believe they will find that He is real; not like any god or spiritual figure that has existed since the beginning of our created/evoluted time.
The things in the Bible that are up for debate are, more likely than not, sidepoints. The key to the Bible (well, the Christian Bible w/ New Testament) is the fact that We are sinners, Jesus died for us, believe in Jesus to receive forgiveness for sin in lieu of His payment. To me, that is the most important part. I can read the Bible and learn new insightful things that may or may not be affected by my interpretation, but that core point will never change, at least not for me. I'm not a good person to argue with about the Bible because I honestly am not that concerned about arguing my point with other people. I stopped trying to *make* people believe in the Bible when I realized I don't have that power.
Not really, I don't have 100% of the Bible memorized, but I've read through it an nothing jumped out at me as being a contradiction. Where and what in the Bible says everything is the exact same as it was when it was first created?
I'm of the same mind as you. I have a deep rooted faith in God and the Bible, but I can accept evolution. I think the problem with many people is that they hear the word evolution and equate it with 'God doesn't exist'. I've always believed that evolution fits well within a created universe. In fact, it is only *natural* that things would evolve given the design of things. I will agree that most people who are uneducated on evolution are the ones who dispute it being taught in school. And while I don't believe that we *evolved* from apes, I can see where species can evolve in order to adapt to certain environments (dinos to birds maybe?).