Mon Jan 14, 2008 8:43 pm
prove both statements
Tue Jan 15, 2008 5:42 am
The original post is touted as "a well done argument against Christianity".
After reviewing the sources utilized for the basis of such claims, I would at least from my understanding respectfully disagree.
The more appropriate original description would be coined "a half baked argument again st Christianity". :D :lol:
Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:36 am
While it is true that some portions of the original argument are exceptionally poor, there are many elements of the story of Christ that resemble previous beliefs.
The virgin birth was not original. Nor was the concept of the sacrifice to save humanity.
As for fjell's assertions, there are already other posts on this board that deal with the internal inconsistency of logic of the Christian concept of God. I think it would be a distraction from the original post to delve into that here.
Tue Jan 15, 2008 5:08 pm
Thanks Nator, I agree we should stick to the topic more.
I have not come into much contact with primary sources (or close to primary sources) of various mythologies, but focusing on
1. the virgin birth as being not original
2. concept of sacrifice to save humanity not original
can you document them for comparative purposes?
I have little time, to do the job myself but instead rely on books such as from Josh McDowell who wrote:
"Some have attempted to account for the virgin birth by tracing it to Greek or Babylonian mythology. They argue that the Gospel writers borrowed this story from the mythology of their day. This view does not fit the facts, for there is not any hero in pagan mythology for which a virgin birth is claimed, and moreover it would be unthinkable to the Jewish mind to construct such a story from mythology.
"Many deities among Greeks, Babylonians and Egyptians were reported born in an unusual manner, but for the most part these beings never actually existed. The accounts are filled with obvious mythological elements which are totally absent from the Gospel narratives. They are reports of a god or goddess being born into the world by sexual relations between some heavenly being or by some adulterous affair among the gods and goddess." --- Josh McDowell, A Ready Defense
Wed Jan 16, 2008 8:49 am
I don't have much time, but I can try to double check my sources. This could take quite a bit of time though, so don't expect a rapid response.
Wed Jan 16, 2008 4:26 pm
If you have references already, if it means you having to waste time brushing up on mythologies, I wouldn't object to scrapping this line of enquiry. Instead we should look at how the bible mentioning of place names and notable individuals that were previously thought mythological turns up later through archaeology and finds.
I have heard that the name Sargon, and the people group called Hittites were once thought to be made up, non-existent, but arhaelogical evidence turns up to validate them. This and many more.
From your perspective, if these add to the veracity of the bible.
Wed Jan 16, 2008 9:23 pm
I can find the references, but it will take time as I do not keep them on hand due to this not being a topic brought up in typical conversation or the day to day duties of my profession.
As for archaeological finds validating place names and cultures mentioned in the Bible, especially the OT, I do not see that they add to the veracity of the Bible in the least.
My undergraduate studies focused on history and anthropology, and I know from those studies alone that peoples and cultures are exceptionally unskilled in creating such things whole cloth, as it were. Instead, what is far more likely to have happened, and has been observed in cultures with oral histories and even to some extent those cultures with written histories, the groups and places actually did exist, though their size and the scale of the fight most likely were not as big as reported.
Nor do I think those peoples were as 'evil' as portrayed in the Bible. War is ugly business, and I have discovered that well over 99% of the time, the us vs. them mentality leads to demonization, which definitely carries over into the history of the winners who, after all, write the histories that live on.
So, suffice it to say, I am not surprised such places or remnants of peoples were found. In fact, I rather expected finds similar to the ones being made. This actually confirms portions of my original hypothesis.