robtex said:
It is interesting to note that the Jewish culture --whom the Christians took their OT and the Jewish Torah and other books from see their shared documentation as a series of metaphores as a guide to live one life. The Talmud and other current writings are used to act as a continuing education and revison of their understanding of their relationship with G-d.
Somehow in the adoption of Jewish parables so many Christians have taken the parables of metaphores from another religion re-interpreted them as fact and than added a main character late in the script who "comes to save the day" and commands total obedience in exchange for his good deeds as both God and man.
Christianity was not written in a vacuum by any stretch of the imagination. Long before Paul and other authors after his death (roughly 60ad according to wikipedia) a trinity existed in hinduism and Christ is reallly really similar to Krishna. The concept of a soul and judgement is as old as Zoroatrianism according to religoioustolerance.org a religion that is 6000 years older than Christianity.
Actually Christianties newness to the religious world by comparision is a strong arguement against it being the inerrant word of God. A God who created the world and whom would want to reveal himself to his followers would certainly have done so from day one instead of letting thousands (maybe hundreds of thousands) of years go by before tipping his hat about his orgin and nature.
Many of the christian traditions have pagan influences including Christmas whiich is tied wih Yule and Easter with equinox. Just for the record their is not a rabbit they lays eggs in the Bible. In the word-of-mouth story telling of religion metaphores were used as mnemonic tool to more easily remember the word-of-mouth traditions and the Bible's OT was just that.....parables used to dicate themes that were later adopted by Paul who waited a quater of a century before ever writing about his theory about Jesus rebirth.
For the record I put "the bible has nothing to offer me" because the philosphy of the new testiment is in sharp contrast to my own. But that is not to say it doesn't have something to offer others. What it does not offer is a history lesson.
Good points, Rob. I will dispute a few of your points, however. Christianity, as you know, traces its roots through Judaism to Abraham. The dating of Abraham at 3000 BCE places it to about the time the Hindu religion got started and the traditions of the creation story reach far into pre-history and make the first contact with YHWH to humanity undatable. Only the records are datable, and much of it is subjective.
Also, the analogy of the Hindu trinity with the Christian doctrine just doesn't work. The Chrisitan trinity is within the framework of monotheism, the Himdu "trinity" is within the framework of pantheism. You are most correct, however, in your assertion that Christian doctrine was not written in a vacuum. Plato and other Greek philosophy as well as Greek biology may have had a role in shaping the mind and writings of Paul and is considered in critical exegesis concerning marriage and homosexuality.
I will also dispute the "not a history lesson" comment. The Gospels are an accurate record of the life and teachings of the historical Jesus and the original teachings of the apostles. The OT, while not a history book, has important references to historical figures which can be verified.
