Prometheus85
Active Member
I thought so. Muslims believe that he ascended into heaven without being crucified or resurrected – the crucifixion was only an illusion created by God.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Jesus Resurrection
- Thread starter Prometheus85
- Start date
I thought so. Muslims believe that he ascended into heaven without being crucified or resurrected – the crucifixion was only an illusion created by God.
Prometheus85
Active Member
But how do you know the Bible is true? Isn't it just a collection of stories and myths? Even if it contains some history, is there any way we can trust it completely?
joelr
Well-Known Member
Do whatever you need to do.
I didn't see any solid points on Inanna? Weather the OT took ideas from her or not is meaningless.
The 3 day resurrection myth goes back before Inanna all the way to the original sun worshipers.
I provided the section of the lecture where Carrier explains some of the gospels mythic structure, the Rank-R scale which Jesus rates very highly on and the pagan parallels.
While one can say god decided to make the bible characters to look like mythic constructs but are still real supernatural deities one cannot deny that it is mythic. If I said Moby Dick wasn't an obvious piece of literary myth than I would be either not smart enough to understand literary devices or purposely ignoring the fact. It's like denying my bible is written in english. It simply is.
Unless you want to explain away those mythic devices in the gospels, of which I don't think you even learned about?
joelr
Well-Known Member
I am aware of what the bible says. I don't expect the bible to say where it's myths come from?
In the Matrix Neo was like Jesus but it doesn't say that. We just know that myths are passed on.
joelr
Well-Known Member
Ugg.
So you're not aware of astrotheology at all?
At the solstice the sun rises to it's lowest point in Dec. Each day it rises to this low point and then on the 3rd day - boom, it begins to rise higher and higher each day - the resurrection of the sun.
The origin of the 3-day dying/rising god myth. As time went on cultures started putting actual gods in place of the sun. Osirus is just one of many many 3 day rising gods.
Even better is the sun is at the constilation that is a "cross".
There is another very interesting phenomenon that occurs around December 25th, or the winter solstice. From the summer solstice to the winter solstice, the days become shorter and colder. From the perspective of the northern hemisphere, the sun appears to move south and get smaller and more scarce. The shortening of the days and the expiration of the crops when approaching the winter solstice symbolized the process of death to the ancients. It was the death of the Sun. [S73] By December 22nd, the Sun's demise was fully realized, for the Sun, having moved south continually for 6 months, makes it to it's lowest point in the sky. Here a curious thing occurs: the Sun stops moving south, at least perceivably, for 3 days.[S74] [M] During this 3 day pause, the Sun resides in the vicinity of the Southern Cross, or Crux, constellation.[S75] [S76] [M] And after this time on December 25th, the Sun moves 1 degree, this time north, foreshadowing longer days, warmth, and Spring.[S77] And thus it was said: the Sun died on the cross, [D] was dead for 3 days, only to be resurrected or born again.[S78] [S79]This is why Jesus and numerous other Sun Gods share the crucifixion, 3-day death, and resurrection concept. [S80] [M] It is the Sun's transition period before it shifts its direction back into the Northern Hemisphere, bringing Spring, and thus salvation.[S81] [S82] [M]
However, they did not celebrate the resurrection of the Sun until the spring equinox, or Easter. This is because at the spring equinox, the Sun officially overpowers the evil darkness, as daytime thereafter becomes longer in duration than night, and the revitalizing conditions of spring emerge.[M] [S83]
Now, probably the most obvious of all the astrological symbolism around Jesus regards the 12 disciples. They are simply the 12 constellations of the Zodiac, which Jesus, being the Sun, travels about with. [S84] [S85] [S86] [S87] [M]
In fact, the number 12 is replete throughout the Bible. [M] This text has more to do with astrology than anything else.
Coming back to the cross of the Zodiac, the figurative life of the Sun, this was not just an artistic expression or tool to track the Sun's movements. It was also a Pagan spiritual symbol, [S88] the shorthand of which looked like this. [S89] This is not a symbol of Christianity. [M] It is a Pagan adaptation of the cross of the Zodiac. [S90] [S91] This is why Jesus in early occult art is always shown with his head on the cross, for Jesus is the Sun, the Sun of God, the Light of the World, [S92] the Risen Savior, [S93] who will "come again,"[S94] as it does every morning, the Glory of God [S95] who defends against the works of darkness,[S96] as he is "born again" [S97] every morning, and can be seen "coming in the clouds,"[S98] "up in Heaven,"[S99]with his "Crown of Thorns,"[S100] or, sun rays.
This is D.M. Murdocks work
Zeitgeist the movie/Transcript - Wikiversity
Now you know why Dec 25 and 3 days are significant and used in myth. And what the dying on a cross symbology came from.
How are myths historical?
You know not all scholars agree right?[/QUOTE]
Actually all non-fundamentalist scholars do agree on this matter. The small fundamentalist minority don't count, they are too bias. I've heard fundamentalist scholars debate Carrier, you can as well, they always fail at logic.
At some point in the debate they will mention a gospel event and then Carrier will say "but we don't know that the gospels are reliable because X and Y and so on......
Then the fundamentalist comes back with "but it says so in the gospel right here....."
So they always fall into circular logic - "I believe the gospels because it says so in the gospels".
Not always, sometimes they realize the truth.
Former fundamentalist Christian Brian Flemming went to Seminary school and became a priest and then became interested in the historicity. He realized that the real historical facts are not taught or vastly altered at religion school and he researched what modern scholarship had to say.
He realized religions are myth and did a decent documentary on his findings.
Last edited:
joelr
Well-Known Member
15:37 NT copies Moses to create Jesus stories. They don't credit that.
23:07 Elijah's story is used to create a Jesus story. They didn't credit that.
38:44 Sermon on the Mount stolen from the Greek Septugant. They didn't credit that.
39:26 in Luke the boy Jesus story is copied into the Emmaus tale, no credit given
46:09 John invents a fake Lazurus from the original Lazurus, no credit given
plus the external borrowing, a dying rising demigod who dies to defeat evil and help his followers get to the afterlife, no credit given.
12 apostles, 12 tribes, 12 zodiac, no credit given.
On top of that the NT can admit if they use something from the OT but they are not going to admit all the myths are borrowed from other cultures?
I feel like we're going backwards here? Why would this even be a point at this stage??
Are you just grasping at strawmen?
AdamRaja
Islamic Philosopher
Yes, indeed!
Muffled
Jesus in me
I believe you should do some soul searching. It appears to be a contradiction.
Muffled
Jesus in me
I believe the use of twelve does not mean there was a borrowing. There can be other explanations: coincidence or simply a God who is consistent.
Jollybear
Hey
Sometimes i wonder if theres even a point to debating.
Perhaps theres no credit because theres nothing there to credit. Perhaps your "reading to much into it that which isnt there".
Your posts are just littered with assumption after assumption.
Ok....let me address something else about this sun worship thing.
OT, Psalm 84:11 says "For the LORD God is a sun and shield; the LORD bestows favor and honor; no good thing does he withhold from those whose walk is blameless."
And NT 2 peter 1:19 "Because of that experience, we have even greater confidence in the message proclaimed by the prophets. You must pay close attention to what they wrote, for their words are like a lamp shining in a dark place--until the Day dawns, and Christ the Morning Star shines in your hearts."
And OT Malachi 4:2 "But for you who fear my name, the Sun of Righteousness will rise with healing in his wings. And you will go free, leaping with joy like calves let out to pasture."
And OT, psalm 19:4-5 "In the heavens God has pitched a tent for the sun. It is like a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, like a champion rejoicing to run his course.
It rises at one end of the heavens and makes its circuit to the other"
NT, Luke 5:35 "But the time will come when the bridegroom will be taken from them; in those days they will fast."
John 8:12 "When Jesus spoke again to the people, he said, "I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life."
Ok, notice these verses? Theres lots more, but, i want to consolidate my posts to be as short as possible.
God is refered to as a sun, christ refered to a bridegroom, the sun refered to as bridegroom, christ refered to as a light and a star. A star is a sun.
Ok, what do these verses prove? First off, in one sense by me presenting these verses it kinda looks like im helping your case, doesent it?
Well, not exactly. I presented these to make a point. And....here is the point.
These passages are NOT saying God is literally a sun, light, shield, bridegroom, light or star. Its not saying the people worship a sun either. Its using parabolic language.
In fact, God is compared to more then just a sun, light, star or bridegroom. Like the first verse says, hes compared to a shield too. Hes also compared to a shephard, an eagle, a tree with fruit, a cloud, a seed, a father, a warrior and the list goes on.
But none of it means he IS those things literally. In fact, the WHOLE bible is quite clear in numerious passages, some ive already showed you that God transcends the creation. That means he is not a sun, a shield, a bridegroom, a light, a tree, a shephard, ect. He transcends these things.
So what if some peoples back in ancient times worshiped parts of creation, including the sun, the biblical teachers/prophets rejected that form of religion.
joelr
Well-Known Member
A consistent god as a reason for 12 appearing all over mythology even though it's traced back to the 12 zodiac? So the bible warns of worshiping other gods but then god puts "12" all over other mythology.
That is very sketchy and dubious reasoning.
joelr
Well-Known Member
See now you are in denial because an assumption has no proof.
These are theories and hypothesis because I provide mountains of material to back them up.
It is fact that there were sun worship cults. It is fact that they celebrated the 3-day death and resurrection of the sun. It is a fact that later religions started worshiping "gods" who were taking the place of the older sun worship. Some of the Egyptian gods are direct remnants of sun worship.
So it's NOT an assumption to say that's what Christianity is. If you say that you are in denial of those facts. You obviously don't agree with these theories that that's what Christianity is but to say there is nothing but assumptions is simply not true.
You just don't agree.
Yes these passages do help prove my point. That the original "god" who was worshiped was the sun. Just as the original 3 day death and resurrection was a myth about the sun. Later cultures anthropomorphized the sun into a sky-father who punishes and rewards his people, like a king.
Just as they anthropomorphized the sun dying and rising into a god man/woman.
we don't know who or which culture started using gods as a replacement for the sun. We only know of the Persian religion and the oldest savior messiah and that there were sun worshiping cultures before that. There are no records or scripture to show details this is just common sense.
But trying to say that the OT god isn't the literal sun because of passages in the OT is so silly I don't know what else to say?
Of course the OT isn't going to say god = sun? They never say Neo = Jesus in the Matrix.
They never say Romulus = Zalmoxus, each myth considers itself to be the first myth of it's kind.
Of course the biblical teachers rejected other teachings?!?!?!
When you say "God transcends the creation." you're just saying what it SAYS IN THE BIBLE?!?!
Every religion since humans were in Africa wrote scripture about their gods and godmen and considered it literal truth (scripture). That doesn't mean anything and it doesn't prove anything.
If you want to say what god is then tell him to show up in Times Square and have him explain it. Otherwise quoting scripture is pointless?
People worshiped the sun, then they anthropomorphized the sun into archaic gods who require blood sacrifices of sheep and children because they didn't understand nature. Do you think the Persians had a mythology and the Serians, Egyptains, thrasians all came up with a very similar myth without borrowing concepts from each other?
No, you know they all borrowed from each other. But none of them say good things about other religions? The OT is certainly not going to say god is really just the sun?
I thought we were going back to the NT which was the original topic. All I can really say about the OT is that Thomas THompson's work has been studied by the field and accepted as reason to consider Moses and the Patriarchs mythology. This isn't a surprise but I'm not interested in OT studies at all.
It's Richard Carriers work that's still under debate.
However you just said:
"the sun dont stay down 3 days, then rise. It goes down, then the next morning it rises. Thats not 3 days."
and I explained it clearly to you and you ignored it (like most information I put forth). I mean, you asked about the 3 day thing, you made that point like it was relevant to your argument and that there was no way to show how the sun "dies" for 3 days - but actually there is and now you know. But conveniently then you switch directions and just completely ignored it and came back with "why you making assumptions??"
Well you ASKED about it. You made it into a point of contention then drop it when I come through with information. Even worse, then you come at ME with all this crap about there is "no point to debating.."
Last edited:
joelr
Well-Known Member
Archeology of the Hebrew Bible
This is actually a very interesting article about the OT.
The archeologist isn't exactly an atheist, he seems to have some belief in god, but being the most experienced OT archeologist he just doesn't take early scripture literal. But he believes in the power of the messages either as metaphorical inspiration or as humans attempt to describe something beyond what we can describe.
But to a literal point of view there is no evidence for Abraham or Moses, Israelites (just random villages), Joshua, polytheism was actually popular and a female goddess was associated with Yaweh - Asherah.
"Yahweh and Asherah" all over the place in the Hebrew inscriptions.
"This is awkward for some people, the notion that Israelite religion was not exclusively monotheistic. But we know now that it wasn't. Monotheism was a late development. Not until the Babylonian Exile and beyond does Israelite and Judean religion—Judaism—become monotheistic."
After the fall of Jerusalem they decided polytheism wasn't working out.
I didn't know any of this stuff.
Jollybear
Hey
Like i said, im gonna deal with this in bits. For time purposes. I dont know how long it takes you to read, think, look up stuff, then type a response, but me, all that can take 3 hours. And if i dealt with all of your posts, it take probably 10 hours.
So, im gonna aprouch this like this, with some questions that require a yes or no answer. Dont bombard me with a magazine worth of info. Just yes or no will suffice. Sometimes people hide behind loads of information, giving the appearence that they know what there talking about, but i can see through all that.
So, here goes.
Did all the earliest ancients worship the sun? Did any worship a God above creation?
2nd question: can ANY ancients come up with the same ideas without borrowing? Or, is no one smart enough to be able to think on there own?
3rd, i still dont understand how the sun went down 3 days. I know at the poles it can stay down for a few months or so. But, where does it do that for 3 days?
4th, are you not aware of the loads of archeology for the exodus?
Also, there is a passage in 2 kings 21
"3He rebuilt the high places his father Hezekiah had destroyed; he also erected altars to Baal and made an Asherah pole, as Ahab king of Israel had done. He bowed down to all the starry hosts and worshiped them. 4He built altars in the temple of the Lord, of which the Lord had said, “In Jerusalem I will put my Name.” 5In the two courts of the temple of the Lord, he built altars to all the starry hosts. 6He sacrificed his own son in the fire, practiced divination, sought omens, and consulted mediums and spiritists. He did much evil in the eyes of the Lord, arousing his anger.
7He took the carved Asherah pole he had made and put it in the temple, of which the Lord had said to David and to his son Solomon, “In this temple and in Jerusalem, which I have chosen out of all the tribes of Israel, I will put my Name forever. 8I will not again make the feet of the Israelites wander from the land I gave their ancestors, if only they will be careful to do everything I commanded them and will keep the whole Law that my servant Moses gave them.” 9But the people did not listen. Manasseh led them astray, so that they did more evil than the nations the Lord had destroyed before the Israelites."
What was one of Moses laws?
Exodus 20
"1And God spoke all these words:
2“I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.
3“You shall have no other gods before a me.
4“You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. 5You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, 6but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments."
So, if archeology reveals that Yahweh and ashara wer worshiped side by side, well by golly, thats what the bible says the isrealites did. But they did it in disobydience to Gods command.
Last edited:
Jollybear
Hey
If the story of the flying monkey is approved by the witness, what then is wrong with you telling it?
joelr
Well-Known Member
There are many stages of religion:
- Paleolithic religion
- Prehistoric religion
- Bronze and Iron Age religion
As to the sun, it's likely it was the actual first thing worshiped.:
"Solar deities and sun worship can be found throughout most of recorded history in various forms.
Predynasty Egyptian beliefs attribute Atum as the sun-god and Horus as a god of the sky and sun.
Proto-Indo-European religion has a solar chariot, the sun as traversing the sky in a chariot.[citation needed] In Germanic mythology this is Sol, in Vedic Surya, and in Greek Helios (occasionally referred to as Titan) and (sometimes) as Apollo. In Proto-indo-European mythology the sun appears to be a multilayered figure, manifested as a goddess but also perceived as the eye of the sky father Dyeus.[3][4]
During the Roman Empire, a festival of the birth of the Unconquered Sun (or Dies Natalis Solis Invicti) was celebrated on the winter solstice—the "rebirth" of the sun—which occurred on December 25 of the Julian calendar. In late antiquity, the theological centrality of the sun in some Imperial religious systems suggest a form of a "solar monotheism". The religious commemorations on December 25 were replaced under Christian domination of the Empire with the birthday of Christ.[5]
There is sun worship across every culture.
Depends what you are talking about. It's all measured in probabilities.
I mean if you take sun myths about dying/rising in 3 days and then get a savior deity who does the same in 3 days and is described with all sorts of words like "light, shine, son/sun" and they both relate to Dec 25 than the likelyhood is high it's synchretism - "The blending or inorganic merging of heterogeneous elements. An example is the merging of different cults and religious systems in late antiquity— the religous syncretism of the Hellenistic period."
If you were not Christian I think you would probably agree.
Joseph Campbel writes of discovering the Garden of Eden mythology in an ancient African scripture.
Dec 22, day ends with the sun rising to it's lowest point. It continues to raise to that point every day for 3 days then it's begins getting higher and higher each day. For ancient people this was the supreme mystery and the thing they worshiped most - the giver of light and heat who moved through the sky every day (they didn't know the Earth was moving)
"The primary, motivating factor that inspired early man to worship god, was his fear and dread of the potential fierceness of his environment. His (primitive man) major impetus for worshipping and sacrificing to the Sun God was to assure that the Sun God would continue protecting mankind from the ravages of the dreaded winter.
So for primitive man, the inception of winter, Dec. 22, was the worst day of every year for him. This day, Dec. 22 was the start of winter and marked the beginning of the worst stage of his yearly struggle for survival. This day, Dec. 22, is referred to by astronomers as the Winter Solstice. This word, Solstice, according to Webster's Dictionary means "to stand still, pause, a turning point." Primitive man even believed the Sun had died as he could detect no movement of the Sun in the sky for 3 days and and these 3 days were days having the shortest daylight of the year. This day, Dec. 22, the start of winter, was the harbinger of his potential perdition.
On Dec. 22 of each year, the Sun reached its Winter Solstice, the lowest point of the trajectory (angle of rays) of the entire year. After Dec. 22 (the turning point), the Sun again rises northward, which is a sign that summer shall come again!
Even though Dec. 22 marks the beginning of winter and the weather turns progressively worst from that point (Dec. 22) until the spring (March 21), all is not lost. Because the fact that the angle of the Sun's rays projecting on the earth, was moving progressively northward told early man that the warmth and comfort of the summer Sun would eventually prevail. But there was a period of doubt, for early primitive civilization. Primitive man did not understand our universe and solar system as we do today. We, today, know exactly what causes the four seasons of the year. But early man did not. He did not possess knowledge of our Solar System, the axis of the earth, its rotation and revolving around the Sun. He did not understand that these forces operated by a Natural, Providential Law, that would stay its course, no matter what. Early man only understood the result, not the cause. Because of this he would "reason" such events as best he could and these resulting "myths" would be handed down among mankind until Science would advance to replace such foolishness. The problem is that such foolishness would be later personified into acts of each nation's heroes and later ascribed to Jesus by the Sun-worshipping Romans who had control over the New Testament."
Good source. Your source is nothing?
The Exodus: Does archaeology have a say?
The Jerrusalem Post
The Exodus: Does archaeology have a say?
The short answer is “no.” The whole subject of the Exodus is embarrassing to archaeologists. The Exodus is so fundamental to us and our Jewish sources that it is embarrassing that there is no evidence outside of the Bible to support it. So we prefer not to talk about it, and hate to be asked about it.
For the account in the Torah is the basis of our people’s creation, it is the basis of our existence and it is the basis of our important Passover festival and the whole Haggada that we recite on the first evening of this festival of freedom. So that makes archaeologists reluctant to have to tell our brethren and ourselves that there is nothing in Egyptian records to support it. Nothing on the slavery of the Israelites, nothing on the plagues that persuaded Pharaoh to let them go, nothing on the miraculous crossing of the Red Sea, nothing.
Nothing at all. There are three Pharaohs who said they got rid of the hated foreigners, but nothing to say who the foreigners were, and no Pharaoh is named as having persecuted foreign slaves or suffered unspeakable plagues.
Also, there is a passage in 2 kings 21
Plus my link from William Denver, leading OT archeologist
Archeology of the Hebrew Bible
No evidence for Exodus.
No, first - "The portrait of Israelite religion in the Hebrew Bible is the ideal, the ideal in the minds of those few who wrote the Bible—the elites, the Yahwists, the monotheists. But it's not the ideal for most people."
So the people who wrote the OT were those elitists - the Yahwists - so when they wrote what god was supposedly saying they had god say bad stuff about other gods. But archeology is saying that polytheism was more popular in those days.
William Dever: From the beginnings of what we call biblical archeology, perhaps 150 years ago, scholars, mostly western scholars, have attempted to use archeological data to prove the Bible. And for a long time it was thought to work. [William Foxwell] Albright, the great father of our discipline, often spoke of the "archeological revolution." Well, the revolution has come but not in the way that Albright thought. The truth of the matter today is that archeology raises more questions about the historicity of the Hebrew Bible and even the New Testament than it provides answers, and that's very disturbing to some people.
The fact is that archeology can never prove any of the theological suppositions of the Bible.
We want to make the Bible history. Many people think it has to be history or nothing. But there is no word for history in the Hebrew Bible. In other words, what did the biblical writers think they were doing? Writing objective history? No. That's a modern discipline. They were telling stories. They wanted you to know what these purported events mean.
The OT is so not in any way historical. Moses, which is an Egyptian name, is considered a myth. There is no historical information there. Just superstitions from ancient tribes.
lukethethird
unknown member
It's hearsay when you tell it.
syo
Well-Known Member
The Orthodox believe the apostles to be witnesses that speak the truth.
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
There's nothing wrong with me telling it.
It just would not be a FIRSTHAND/EYEWITNESS ACCOUNT. That is the point here.
Jollybear
Hey
So just to be clear, your view is that ALL people at FIRST worshiped the sun? NO ONE worshiped what they believed to be a God above the sun or other parts of creation?
So, NO ONE held different views at this same time the goddess view was made?
So, it was likely ALL people at first worshiped the sun and not one person disagreed and held a different view?
Ok, some peoples worshiped the sun, what are you proving by this?
All this is, is assertion. Sorry, theres no proof of this statement. You gave none. Do you expect me just to accept what you say as fact or something? Not a chance.
There you go again overusing this word "probable". You have no idea what your talking about.
The fact is IF i was not a christian, i STILL WOULD NOT adhere to the mythic structure view of the bible. LISTEN TO ME VERY CAREFULLY. If i was a naturalist/agnostic/atheist/or diest, whatever, i would NOT adhere to mythicism view of the bible. I utterly reject that hypotheses.
Heres what view i would adhere to if i was not a christian: the bible is historical structure, ALL of it, with NATURAL phenomona's that took place that was misunderstood by ancients and thought to be from God. The phenomona's wer real, but natural.
Thats the view id take if i wer not a christian.
The reason i dont even hold that view is because ive had spiritual, veridical experiences that tell me these things come from God. That God, soul, spirits are real.
Wheres the evidence of that? You just keep saying it.
Where is it documented that the sun stays down anywhere at any month for 3 days?
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=m26HGdOGeeM&ved=0ahUKEwju9s2tk7feAhUhheAKHXRzCkUQo7QBCCYwAA&usg=AOvVaw18z-2ZHOth9wxNMV0MWJVW
This video, exodus decoded and real mount sinai is the evidence.
How do you know what "most" believed? You like to over use the word probable too. Which you keep getting that wrong with regards to me. If your gonna believe something, atleast try to be accurate.
The point is, the bible shows along with the archeology that Yahweh and ashara wer both worshiped.
This is amazing, just act like you know what most people believed back then. Hell, you even act like i pretended to believe the bible was not mythical structure.
I think you should question your own assumptions. Theres a wide veriety of beliefs back then, just like there is today. Just like there is on these forums.