LuckyCharm

Oh, far be it from me to claim that the prevalence of a belief is proof of its validity! It wasn't so long ago, relatively speaking, that folks believed you could cure mental illness by opening the skull, or that you could tell a witch by tossing a woman in water. Has science finally rescued us from all those unfortunate superstitions? Don't be too hasty -- what about that whole thalidomide thing, or more recently, post-menopausal hormone replacement therapy?

No, majority opinion is definitely not an accurate measure of truth. If it were, I wouldn't be a Christian.

If you really think about it, it's always been the bold visionaries throughout history who have discovered the most amazing truths, usually only to be rewarded by derision, disdain, and sometimes death -- until we found out they were right!

~~Cheryl

Yellum Notnef

Cheryl:
Theres a vast difference between someones computer problems turning out to be real and a man FLOATING OFF THE PLANET INTO THE SKY.
Really Cheryl,to come here and give us a lesson on logic when you believe in the most unlogical things of all is laughable.


If YOU really think about it (or even do a bit of research *gasp*) you`ll find out that most of those "bold visionaries" were rewarded by derision,disdain,and death by the church and good bible believing Christians like yourself.

I`m going to guess that one of these visionaries you mentioned was jesus. If this is correct could you please fill us all in on the "most amazing truths" Jesus or other early Christians discovered? And which of these truths kept the Christian church from dragging the Western world straight into the dark ages?

LuckyCharm

Apparently, Fenton, you've developed the impression that I believe Jesus floated "off the planet and into the sky," as if heaven were located somewhere in outer space. I'm sorry to know you've made such an inaccurate assumption about my beliefs. But, to stick to the subject at hand....

The mere fact that an event is unlikely does not make it impossible or "illogical." If I told you that I had just flipped a coin 500 times in a row, coming up with heads each time, would you automatically assume I was lying, simply because such a sequence defies statistical probability? It might be highly unlikely, or even unheard-of, but that in no way makes it "illogical" or impossible. Conversely, many "illogical" things actually do occur, regularly -- how else do you explain precognition, telepathy, and mind over matter? (Well, maybe you don't have any personal experience with such things, but I do.)


I'm not sure how this relates to the topic.


So much for your talent at guessing my thoughts, Fenton -- you're about 0 for 4 right now. When I originally wrote that post, I actually had in mind such figures as Galileo, Copernicus, the Wright brothers, Georges Lemaître (Catholic abbé and astronomer who in 1927 first postulated the Big Bang theory), etc. But since you mention Jesus, I certainly agree that He belongs right up in there with the best of them. His injunction against worry has been borne out by medical science as a very pro-survival attitude. Likewise His laws of non-retaliation, forgiveness, and faith -- science has shown that people who live in bitterness, vindictiveness and despair are more likely to develop severe health problems, and cause them in others, than those who adopt a gentler and more peaceful style. We are quite familiar with these concepts today (although we see them all too seldom put into practice!), but in His day, they were positively revolutionary.

~~Cheryl

P.S. Here's an interesting article, for anyone who might be interested: The New Convergence

Yellum Notnef

Cheryl,
Why don`t you tell us what your beliefs are before anyone else here wastes anymore time arguing against things you don`t believe in.

Lets start simple.
1.)What Christian sect do you belong to?

2.) Where is Jesus right now? Most Christians seem to believe that Jesus bodily floated off to Heaven. Where is Heaven if it`s not somewhere in outerspace?

3.) Are you a creationist?

I`m not going to waste anymore of my time with this until I know more about your particular flavor of Christianity since you will just keep telling me my assumptions about you are incorrect.

Bobzammel

Jesus's ethics against worry, love, and forgiveness are not exclusive. Buddhism for instance has an ethics system similar to Christianity. Both are similar in the sense that they often do away with most rituals.
However Christianity has a bit of a dark side. Many of the beliefs expressed in the New Testament are very "Cult" like in nature. This aspect of Christianity has been downplayed by many ministers; but it still remains.

Without taking up space here's a run-down of some of the cult features of Christianity.:


http://www.mindspring.com/~bab5/BIB/cult.htm

As for evidence of Christ....let's look first at Christ's claims of being a Messiah. To do so, he would have had to fit most of the prophecies. Although Jesus is apparentally stated to be of David's family line, and born in Bethelem, many of the other prophecies refering to him are mainly excerpts of songs(The Psalms)--most of which refer to King David, or other prophecies taken out of context to refer to Jewish kings or the state of Israel at the time prophecies were written. For instance, the "Branch" of Jesse is revealed as a post-exilic figure (Either Joseph, Zerubbel, or both) in the book of Zechiriah. If you closely read the Old Testament, you'll realize something is fishy.
Then there is the historical evidence. Josephus has often been championed as the key source, but a close examination plus Josephus's own background will show that it is pretty much a forgery. Josephus also was born a few years after the alleged date of the crucifixion so he would be writing from second-hand sources anyway.The other historical notices regarding Jesus mainly refer to the Christians themselves.

LuckyCharm

Good idea! :-)


My membership is with the Episcopalian/Anglican church, officially I guess, although I was born and baptized into a Catholic family. I'll leave it to those more interested than me in canon law to sort out which church I'm supposed to rightfully claim.


Jesus is in heaven, of course. However, I do not believe that heaven occupies a location within the space-time continuum in which we find ourselves. How could it? It's eternal and infinite, right?

I don't believe we can even begin to comprehend what heaven means from our limited perspective. Imagine, if you will, that you are a two-dimensional creature living within a plane. You have only length and width -- no depth. Now imagine that a sphere were to intersect this plane... You would experience this sphere as a circle, right? Call the plane "earth" and the sphere "heaven." From your earthly perspective, a being can only be in heaven as long as it occupies points common to both your plane, and the sphere. As soon as it moves even a single point above or below your plane, it vanishes from your view -- it might as well not even exist, as far as you're concerned, because you don't even know such a thing as a third dimension exists. You can't even comprehend how it could.

I believe that what happened at the Ascension was a movement of this nature. And Luke, the physician and probably one of the more articulate and scientifically-minded among the disciples, struggled to describe an event so fantastic, so unthinkable, that nothing he could come up with (and nothing we could come up with, for that matter!) would be adequate. "...he was taken up before their very eyes, and a cloud hid him from their sight," is all we are told in Acts 1:9.

In other words, there's a hiddenness about it, a veiling. To the ancient Jewish mind, heaven was "up," literally, and the "depths" were, of course, the place of the grave, of death. A very spatially-oriented view of things -- but not entirely accurate. When you don't understand something, you tend to express it in terms you do understand, for lack of any better way. I get this all the time at work, for example -- customer writes in, irate: "Would you stop sending me these update notifications! They're interfering with my work! I want you out of my computer right now!" They don't understand that nobody's accessing their computer or sending them personal messages -- it's a utility that they can easily configure themselves.

So when Luke says Jesus was taken "up," he was only using the language he knew, and that his readers were familiar with. But I don't believe, myself, that heaven is somewhere in outer space. It's completely outside of space, unbound by this three (or four, or five, depending on who you ask) dimensional plane we inhabit.


Another interesting label. I believe that God is the Source and Author of all that is, and all that ever will be. Let me give you another example: I made myself a salad for dinner tonight. Or did I???

It's true that I pulled the plate out of my cupboard and arranged the ingredients on it. But can I claim all credit for that salad? Did I actually grow those vegetables? No, other people did. Or did they? Other people actually planted, tended, and harvested them, and transported them to a store where I could conveniently purchase them, true. But who provided the soil, and the sunlight, and the rain, that allowed them to grow? And who provided me with this amazing body, with its complex system of bones, muscles, nerves, and everything else that allows me to make choices like, "I am going to have a spinach salad tonight," and actually carry them out? Oh, these were all coded in my DNA, you might answer. Yes, but who wrote the "rules" for DNA, and genes, and growth? Who set it all up this way in the first place?

So, to answer your question, yes I am a creationist -- but I can embrace evolution as well, as just another example of my Creator's marvelous providence, care, and creativity.


Well, I certainly hope this helps a little, and I hope I didn't bore anybody too much along the way! Believe me, I tried to keep it as brief as possible -- but am always willing to discuss these things further, either here or in private.

Peace,

~~Cheryl

Anti-Creedance Front

People are getting really off-topic here.... back on the subject please.

LuckyCharm

Hello, Bob. Yes, most of the great religions of history have shared common ethical themes -- that's what makes them great, is it not? However, Jesus was speaking to a first-century Jewish audience, to whom such concepts were not as real as their "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" system of retribution, and their complex legal and penal codes. So to His audience, non-retaliation and forgiveness were radical concepts indeed!


I think we might be getting off-topic here, but I don't mind if you don't...... :-)


Well, hopefully without taking up too much space, I'll answer some of the points in this article...

"It is said that one identifying aspect of a cult is that it teaches that it is the one, true way, and that only the cult members can properly understand the word of God. The opinions and interpretations of others are wrong, and proceed merely from the minds of unbelievers."

This isn't true of my church. We honor wisdom wherever it is found, and frequently that is among great souls who do not happen to share our path.

"We already know that Christianity is guilty of doing the same thing. It condemns others who don't believe as it teaches, and Christians will brand many groups whose methods are similar to their own as cults."

I'm a Christian, and I don't condemn anyone.

"One would be blind not to notice this when one sees a sea of people, all hands raised in the air, sacharrine smiles pasted on nearly ever face, swaying the the words of preacher or song. Christians embrace this when seen in themselves, but see it as cultish in non-believers.

Personally, I am not comfortable with this style of worship.

"Christians are constantly reminded to think whether their actions and beliefs please their lord, and coincide with his will. "Not my will, but yours be done, lord." Of course, that will is often determined by the leaders of a particular church. If the believer deviates in will or opinion too much, and cannot be reigned in through any of the above methods, he is expelled from the church."

I am one of those people who deviates regularly and sharply from the opinions of most people I know. Yet I have never been expelled from a Christian church (Scientology, yes! Now, there's a cult for ya!]

"Personal assests are assimilated into the organisation. Failure or reluctance to do so is met with doctrines, attitudes, and social pressure which induces feelings of guilt or obligation."

Hmm... this has just never been my own experience. Not even close.

"There are also churches where the giving is checked, and the church keeps tabs on who gives and how much. This might have a place in business marketing, but in God's house? Surely he is able to keep track of this himself."

To my knowledge, churches that keep track do it as a courtesy, in order to be able to provide the member official corroboration of his contributions should he decide to claim them as tax deductions.

"If a believer finds that a doctrine is not sound, he is reminded that his poor mind is not fit to judge the doctrines of God, and is pointed to the opinions of the church founders, leaders, or their writings."

*just laughs* Ummm, well, as much as I disagree, question, and challenge any of the teachings presented within my church, I have never been accused of having a "poor mind"! But I do genuinely respect the thoughts, insights, and opinions of many of our church fathers....

"Of course, the member is never left to determine divine guidance on his or her own."

Definitely not Episcopalian/Anglican. If anything, leaders are apt to ask you what you believe the Holy Spirit is leading you to do -- can be more frustrating than the converse, in certain circumstances!

"Christians have been doing this for centuries through all sorts of accessories: crucifixes, necklaces, tatoos, bumper sitckers, little fish symbols, and clothing."

Mmm-hmmm... and I have seen just as many copycat fish symbols with the word "Darwin" enclosed therein. So what? People have been using symbols to express their beliefs since the dawn of man. Big deal.

But enough of all that... Greg Koukl has an excellent article called How to Keep from Getting Spiritually Weird that addresses some of the potential aberrations in Christianity.

I'm not quite sure I get your point here. Could you provide specific references to the verses you're concerned with?

I don't know which Josephus reference you're citing here as a "key source," or why you believe it's a forgery. And anyway, are we discussing the reliability of Josephus, or whether Mithraism casts doubt upon the claims of Christianity?

In case you decide to start a new thread on this subject, please let me know via email, since this is the only thread I have bookmarked, and I don't know when I'll have a chance to browse the rest at leisure.

Thanks,

~~Cheryl

Sojourner553

Thank you CX for the background.

I have one issue on a tangential point made by you:

This presupposes that Judaism was a pure religion -- and never borrowed from any of its pagan neighbors -- Greek or otherwise.

I would argue there was a well of cosmologies and doctrines that interacted with all religions -- pagan (including Egyptian, Babylonian, Greek), Jewish, and Christian:


For example: It was after the Jews were freed from the Babylon Captivity by the Persians that the ancient hebrews revised some of their earlier doctrines to be in line with Zoastrianism:

(1) the belief in a POWERFUL Devil who is the cause of evil in the universe. [older OT verses spoke of a God who was the source of all good AND evil]

(2) the belief in a resurrection of the dead on earth after a powerful divine conflict between the forces of Good and Evil (involving legions of angels on one side and demons on the other.)

(3) the belief that demons were responsible for moral and physical evil, and could thus be removed through exorcism.



During the second century B.C., the hebrew Maccabees (influenced by the recently discovered book of Daniel) fought off their Seleucid Greek oppressors. The writings from these later times show they possessed apocalyptic hopes that were similar to Zorastrianism doctrines.--It was believed that god and his legion of angels would come down to help the virtuous Jews fight off their wicked oppressors on earth, in a final showdown with evil. The faithful would be resurrected to live in a a new kingdom ON EARTH!

This new hope for a resurrection can be seen in Daniel 12:2,

"And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame AND everlasting contempt"

Another memorable line from the book of Maccabees tells of the young captured hebrew, who offered his limbs to his torturer saying,

"It was from Heaven that I received these [limbs]; for the sake of His laws, I disdain them; from Him I hope to receive them again.") (2 Macc. 7:11)

Later, Greek concepts also penetrated into some hebrew writings. The books of Enoch and Wisdom (circa 100 B.C.) are believed to have been influenced by Greek gnosticism. These writings tell of intermediary divine spiritual beings, who existed between God and mankind. One immortal female spirit known as Wisdom came down from heaven to earth, and returned to live with God after her revelations were rejected by men on earth. Some hellenized hebrews spoke of a SPIRIT that survived man's death and lived with God in a kingdom in the SKY. Philo of Alexandria (20 B.C.E.-43 C.E.), wrote of a spiritual
afterlife in heaven with God--believing that Moses' spirit lived in the very highest realm with God.

for more details, see:
http://mac-2001.com/philo/crit/UNIVERSE.TXT

Regarding Mithras and the story of the rock: my sources indicated there was not just one version of his cosmology, but instead a myriad of versions probably influenced by blending with various cultures. A parallel would be to look at all the different versions of Buddhism that exist today.

Yours is an interesting post though; I do not mean to detract from that!

Sojourner

CX

Actually I didn't intend that at all. It is quite obvious that Judaism developed influenced by surrounding cultures and that much of what we know as Judaic comes from other sources. My point is the Xians borrowed from the Jews only. Who the jews borrowed from is a serperate question and one which I think illuminates some of the similarities between Xiantiy and other religions. That being said none of this contributes to the argument that Xianity borrowed from Roman Mithraism which is unsupported by the facts.