• 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!

Why Didn't God Leave Huge Quantities of Secular Evidence For Jesus?

joelr

joelr

Well-Known Member
Skywalker said:
Christianity is unique in its belief about God coming to save people. Osiris didn't die on the cross for his creation. Jesus dying on the cross was the deepest expression of love that he had for his creation.
Click to expand...


These gods were all Saviors to the people who followed them. In different ways. Judaism has more issues with sin so their savior dealt more with sin. Who cares, it's still all fiction? Just because one myths says sins are the most important thing that god hates and you need a way to erase this sin magic? Did you have too many graven images, not rest on Sunday, take the Lords name in vein (no real god could possibly be this worried about freedom of religion), well then you need the Jewish savior because Yahweh is strict.

Generally salvation meant to live forever in some form. In Christianity living forever meant your sins had to be erased. It's so archaic and bronze age but whatever.

Baal was a type of savior and later became a personal savior god but most of the scripture was destroyed by the church. Probably because he was a lot like Jesus.

Baal (or “Ba’al”) was one of the most ancient of resurrected gods. His death is probably the same mourned under the name Hadad-Rimmon in Zechariah 12:11. But whether or no, in pre-Christian texts Baal’s corpse is found by Anat, so in his myth the god is definitely dead; one text even outright says “and the gods will know that you are dead,” and multiple gods actually declare him dead; he is then buried, and funeral rites performed (Mettinger, Riddle, pp. 60-62). There are then clear references to Baal’s resurrection. In fact, his returning to life and then living forever are used as analogies in pre-Christian immortality spells (Mettinger, Riddle, pp. 69-71). Though this god was then not yet a personal savior but a metaphor for communal agricultural salvation, that was prior to Hellenization. He was transformed into one of the many personal savior gods of the region we hear of at the dawn of Christianity (Jupiter Dolichenus), but are allowed to know nothing about, owing to the Medieval Christian destruction of pagan evidence. For example, Hippolytus devoted two entire chapters of his Refutation of All Heresies to the mystery cults and their savior deities. Curiously, those are the only two books wholly destroyed. Go figure. What were the Medievals trying to hide? What did they not want us to read? I’ll let your imagination ponder.
 
joelr

joelr

Well-Known Member
Skywalker said:
Pagan gods did not sacrifice themselves to save us from our own destruction. God can't just forgive us because that would be an insult to holiness.
Click to expand...
"savior gods"?

They are personal salvation cults
They are usually the “son” of a supreme God
They guarantee the individual a good place in the afterlife
They are joined through baptism
They are maintained through communion
They all undergo a “passion” (a “suffering” or “struggle,” literally the same word in Greek, patheôn).
  • By which “passion” (of whatever kind) they obtain victory over death.
  • Which victory they then share with their followers (typically through baptism and communion).
The Jewish version is as different to the Syrian version as is the Thracian version to the Greek version. Doesn't matter.

Gods don't need to forgive people because there are no gods in the sky watching humans and they would not care about graven images and coveting neighbors. "Holiness" is a made-up word and blood magic atonement sacrifices belong in the bronze age.


 
N

night912

Well-Known Member
Skywalker said:
How could the Christians have copied the Zoroastrian view of the Messiah if the blood of Zoroaster doesn't forgive people from their sins?
Click to expand...

plagiarize
transitive verb

: to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own : use (another's production) without crediting the source
intransitive verb

: to commit literary theft : present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source

Source: Definition of PLAGIARIZE


Note that if someone plagiarized a material source, it doesn't mean that it has to be word for word.
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Skywalker said:
How could Jesus be based off of pagan gods if the essence of who they is totally different? The details might not be that different, but if the essence is different there really is no similarity.
Click to expand...
I will answer your with a question:

If you copy only half of a friend's paper in a class did you cheat?
 
S

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
night912 said:
plagiarize
transitive verb

: to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own : use (another's production) without crediting the source
intransitive verb

: to commit literary theft : present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source

Source: Definition of PLAGIARIZE


Note that if someone plagiarized a material source, it doesn't mean that it has to be word for word.
Click to expand...

Jesus dying for our sins isn't a little detail it's what differentiates Christianity from other faiths. It's the essence of the Christian faith.
 
Last edited:
S

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
Subduction Zone said:
I will answer your with a question:

If you copy only half of a friend's paper in a class did you cheat?
Click to expand...

Even if Jesus being hidden as a baby is a theme that exists in other belief systems, it could easily be a coincidence. Throughout history there have been people hiding from dangers.
 
S

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
joelr said:
"savior gods"?

They are personal salvation cults
They are usually the “son” of a supreme God
They guarantee the individual a good place in the afterlife
They are joined through baptism
They are maintained through communion
They all undergo a “passion” (a “suffering” or “struggle,” literally the same word in Greek, patheôn).
  • By which “passion” (of whatever kind) they obtain victory over death.
  • Which victory they then share with their followers (typically through baptism and communion).
The Jewish version is as different to the Syrian version as is the Thracian version to the Greek version. Doesn't matter.

Gods don't need to forgive people because there are no gods in the sky watching humans and they would not care about graven images and coveting neighbors. "Holiness" is a made-up word and blood magic atonement sacrifices belong in the bronze age.

Click to expand...

Quetzalcoatl's followers did not believe in salvation. He wasn't the son of God. The son of God is a reference to Jesus being the Trinity. Many religions believe in salvation by good works. Guaranteeing someone a good place in the afterlife by good works isn't an aspect of Christianity. What baptism existed in the belief system of Quetzalcoatl? Communion represents Jesus dying for our sins. Nobody believes Quetzalcoatl died for anyone's sins. There is no equivalent to Jesus dying on the cross and the story of Quetzalcoatl. Jesus Vs Quetzacoatl – Debunking The Alleged Parallels | Reasons for Jesus

The cross was their symbol. Was represented by three crosses, one larger and two smaller, and was depicted as bearing the cross as a burden, and with nail holes in his feet.This one seems to have been way off base. The closest we get to this in pre-Columbian evidence in the Codex Borgia [Diaz and Rodgers, xxvi], with a larger scene in which Quetz is having his heart extracted by two other deities. Quetz is then “taken to the underworld and to a ball court.” (As a reminder, the “underworld” part is no parallel for Jesus, and the ball court sure isn’t!)

Quetz is next seen on a “cruciform device” (in the shape of a X, not a T) “with five little images of Nanahuatzin, the dead and cooked god of lechery and the evening sun, emerging from his four limbs and his heart.” Diaz and Rodgers note one interpretation of this scene as Quetz transforming into Xolotl-Nanahuatzin.
Click to expand...
 
S

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
joelr said:
These gods were all Saviors to the people who followed them. In different ways. Judaism has more issues with sin so their savior dealt more with sin. Who cares, it's still all fiction? Just because one myths says sins are the most important thing that god hates and you need a way to erase this sin magic? Did you have too many graven images, not rest on Sunday, take the Lords name in vein (no real god could possibly be this worried about freedom of religion), well then you need the Jewish savior because Yahweh is strict.

Generally salvation meant to live forever in some form. In Christianity living forever meant your sins had to be erased. It's so archaic and bronze age but whatever.

Baal was a type of savior and later became a personal savior god but most of the scripture was destroyed by the church. Probably because he was a lot like Jesus.

Baal (or “Ba’al”) was one of the most ancient of resurrected gods. His death is probably the same mourned under the name Hadad-Rimmon in Zechariah 12:11. But whether or no, in pre-Christian texts Baal’s corpse is found by Anat, so in his myth the god is definitely dead; one text even outright says “and the gods will know that you are dead,” and multiple gods actually declare him dead; he is then buried, and funeral rites performed (Mettinger, Riddle, pp. 60-62). There are then clear references to Baal’s resurrection. In fact, his returning to life and then living forever are used as analogies in pre-Christian immortality spells (Mettinger, Riddle, pp. 69-71). Though this god was then not yet a personal savior but a metaphor for communal agricultural salvation, that was prior to Hellenization. He was transformed into one of the many personal savior gods of the region we hear of at the dawn of Christianity (Jupiter Dolichenus), but are allowed to know nothing about, owing to the Medieval Christian destruction of pagan evidence. For example, Hippolytus devoted two entire chapters of his Refutation of All Heresies to the mystery cults and their savior deities. Curiously, those are the only two books wholly destroyed. Go figure. What were the Medievals trying to hide? What did they not want us to read? I’ll let your imagination ponder.
Click to expand...

The same term being used doesn't mean that the two concepts can be compared. in Judaism the Messiah isn't a Savior but more of a political figure. God is against idolatry because God is a jealous God. It's like in marriage. A person can be jealous of their spouse getting attention from someone else.

The belief of Jesus dying for our sins has to do with, nobody can stand in the presence of God in their sinfulness.
 
S

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
joelr said:
Heaven in the OT is not the modern version where all good members go. It was he place where God dwelled:

"There is almost no mention in the Hebrew Bible of Heaven as a possible afterlife destination for human beings, who are instead described as "resting" in Sheol (Genesis 25:7–9, Deuteronomy 34:6, 1 Kings 2:10)."

The heaven taken from the Persians is the modern version where all souls go. Just like the modern version of Satan as an eternal enemy of God was taken from them. As well as monotheism. Professor Fransesca Stravopolou explains in that video I linked to that during the Persian invasion Judaism was re-tooled to become monotheistic and the past invasions of Israel was blamed on being polytheistic.




"It is generally believed by scholars that the ancient Iranian prophet Zarathustra (known in Persian as Zartosht and Greek as Zoroaster) lived sometime between 1500 and 1000 BC. Prior to Zarathustra, the ancient Persians worshipped the deities of the old Irano-Aryan religion, a counterpart to the Indo-Aryan religion that would come to be known as Hinduism. Zarathustra, however, condemned this practice, and preached that God alone – Ahura Mazda, the Lord of Wisdom – should be worshipped. In doing so, he not only contributed to the great divide between the Iranian and Indian Aryans, but arguably introduced to mankind its first monotheistic faith."

The idea of a single god was not the only essentially Zoroastrian tenet to find its way into other major faiths, most notably the ‘big three’: Judaism, Christianity and Islam. The concepts of Heaven and Hell, Judgment Day and the final revelation of the world, and angels and demons all originated in the teachings of Zarathustra, as well as the later canon of Zoroastrian literature they inspired. Even the idea of Satan is a fundamentally Zoroastrian one; in fact, the entire faith of Zoroastrianism is predicated on the struggle between God and the forces of goodness and light (represented by the Holy Spirit, Spenta Manyu) and Ahriman, who presides over the forces of darkness and evil. While man has to choose to which side he belongs, the religion teaches that ultimately, God will prevail, and even those condemned to hellfire will enjoy the blessings of Paradise (an Old Persian word).
How did Zoroastrian ideas find their way into the Abrahamic faiths and elsewhere? According to scholars, many of these concepts were introduced to the Jews of Babylon upon being liberated by the Persian emperor Cyrus the Great. They trickled into mainstream Jewish thought,
Click to expand...

Psalm 23:6 mentions heaven. "Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life, and I shall dwell in the house of the LORD forever." The idea that all good people go to heaven is salvation by works. That is in Zoroastrianism not in Christianity. Ephesians 2:8-9 says, "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast."

Heaven in Zoroastrianism is based off of salvation by good works. What redeemer or Savior means in Zoroastrianism has a totally different meaning than it does in Christianity. Jesus Vs Zoroaster – Debunking The Alleged Parallels | Reasons for Jesus

8. Zoroaster’s followers expect a “second coming” in the virgin-born Saoshyant or Savior, who is to come in 2341 CE and begin his ministry at age 30, ushering in a golden age. I have been able to confirm that this is true to some extent: a return is expected in 2341 CE, to start a golden age; the details on age 30 I have found nowhere. Whether this future Deliverer would indeed be Zoroaster himself again is indeed something that has been interpreted, but later Zoroastrian texts think that the person will be of the line of Zoroaster, not Zoroaster himself. [Wat.Z, 94-5]

A vague doctrine of a future redeemer does appear in texts dated as early as the 400s BC, but only later (9th cent. AD) texts go into detail, reporting three world saviors — “virgin born” in a sense: It seems that some of Zoro’s sperm is being preserved in a lake in Iran, and that three virgins bathing in the lake over the next few thousand years are going to get a big surprise as a result. Virgin born, perhaps, but not virgin conceived. The last of these three guys will eradicate all disease and death and usher in the final victory of good over evil. And that, folks, is about the size of it — there are more convincing parallels to Jesus in Dragonball Z than there are to the big Persian Z.
Click to expand...
 
S

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
joelr said:
Go to 5:10 and the scholar gives a basic overview of what was taken by Jewish scribes.
Click to expand...

Just because the term savior or redeemer is used doesn't mean that it has the same meaning that it does in the Bible.

The second coming of Jesus is a core belief in Christianity. Many Zoroastrians believe that the future deliverer wouldn't be Zoroaster.

Jesus Vs Zoroaster – Debunking The Alleged Parallels | Reasons for Jesus

8. Zoroaster’s followers expect a “second coming” in the virgin-born Saoshyant or Savior, who is to come in 2341 CE and begin his ministry at age 30, ushering in a golden age. I have been able to confirm that this is true to some extent: a return is expected in 2341 CE, to start a golden age; the details on age 30 I have found nowhere. Whether this future Deliverer would indeed be Zoroaster himself again is indeed something that has been interpreted, but later Zoroastrian texts think that the person will be of the line of Zoroaster, not Zoroaster himself. [Wat.Z, 94-5]

A vague doctrine of a future redeemer does appear in texts dated as early as the 400s BC, but only later (9th cent. AD) texts go into detail, reporting three world saviors — “virgin born” in a sense: It seems that some of Zoro’s sperm is being preserved in a lake in Iran, and that three virgins bathing in the lake over the next few thousand years are going to get a big surprise as a result. Virgin born, perhaps, but not virgin conceived. The last of these three guys will eradicate all disease and death and usher in the final victory of good over evil. And that, folks, is about the size of it — there are more convincing parallels to Jesus in Dragonball Z than there are to the big Persian Z.
Click to expand...
 
S

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
joelr said:
Really? Show me a link to where you are studying Egyptian mythology?

Judaism was obsessed with sin and original sin. So when they took the savior god myths for them sin was a much bigger part of the story. Your little points about how each religion had small changes is completely irrelevant. People did not go to heaven in Judaism. They did not go to hell or have Satan at was with God. There was no resurrection for all good members at the end of the world where sinners burn up and many many other things. Judiasm is a mythology and it added other myths during the 2ndtemple period.
What changes they did or did not make doesn't mean anything.

West Side Story is a remake of Romeo and Juliet. You could argue about the differences all day and it still doesn't change the fact that the writers wanted to write an updated version of the story and borrowed the fiction and created a modern version. Movies, books and religion are all made-up stories.

But Hinduism has sin?

"

The way to cancel your sins in Hinduism

All the punishments are only for reformation of the soul and not for revenge. The hell is created by God not with vengeance against sinners but due to kindness to reform the souls. God is always kind to reform the souls, which are His children since the souls are created by Him.
"
Click to expand...

the idea that God loves us so much he would choose to suffer and die for our sins as a person is not found in the rabinnic concept of the Messiah. That's why the Christian concept of a Savior is unique.

Judaism isn't just based off the Old Testament it's also based off of Rabbinic tradition. It's the the Catholic Church is based off the Bible and the catechism. Psalm 23:6 is in the Hebrew Bible and it mentions heaven. "Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life: and I will dwell in the house of the LORD for ever." Job 2:3 mentions Satan inciting God against Job for no reason. The malicious nature of Satan is mentioned in the Hebrew Bible. Psalm 9:17 says, "The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God." The wicked and the saved do not both go to the same place. Heaven, hell, and Satan being the enemy of God is mentioned in the Jewish scriptures.

Hinduism teaches salvation by good works.
 
S

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
Subduction Zone said:
They didn't need to. They were smarter than that.
Click to expand...

Christianity is different from the pagan beliefs because of the focus on having a relationship with God. Should People be Free to Pick and Choose what to Believe about Jesus by Lee Strobel?

“We should clarify that Christianity isn’t primarily about subscribing to a set of doctrines. Christianity is focused on the person of Christ. We’re called into a relationship, not simply to believe a set of doctrines,” he noted.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top