All roads lead to the same God ?

[John1.12]

comparative myths?

2 creation stories and flood narrative mirror Mesopotamian myths

2nd temple Jewish myths:

The unique historical features of Zoroastrianism, such as its monotheism,[5][6][7][8][9] messianism, judgment after death, heaven and hell, and free will may have influenced other religious and philosophical systems, including Second Temple Judaism, Gnosticism, Greek philosophy,[10] Christianity, Islam,[11] the Baháʼí Faith, and Buddhism.
quote from Mary Boyce's book on Zoroastrianism page 29.

2nd Temple on afterlife:


"
Second Temple Judaism
During the period of the Second Temple (c. 515 BC – 70 AD), the Hebrew people lived under the rule of first the Persian Achaemenid Empire, then the Greek kingdoms of the Diadochi, and finally the Roman Empire.[48] Their culture was profoundly influenced by those of the peoples who ruled them.[48] Consequently, their views on existence after death were profoundly shaped by the ideas of the Persians, Greeks, and Romans.[49][50] The idea of the immortality of the soul is derived from Greek philosophy[50] and the idea of the resurrection of the dead is derived from Persian cosmology.[50] By the early first century AD, these two seemingly incompatible ideas were often conflated by Hebrew thinkers.[50] The Hebrews also inherited from the Persians, Greeks, and Romans the idea that the human soul originates in the divine realm and seeks to return there.[48] The idea that a human soul belongs in Heaven and that Earth is merely a temporary abode in which the soul is tested to prove its worthiness became increasingly popular during the Hellenistic period (323 – 31 BC).[40] Gradually, some Hebrews began to adopt the idea of Heaven as the eternal home of the righteous dead.[40]"


on Satan:

During the Second Temple Period, when Jews were living in the Achaemenid Empire, Judaism was heavily influenced by Zoroastrianism, the religion of the Achaemenids.[27][8][28] Jewish conceptions of Satan were impacted by Angra Mainyu,[8][29] the Zoroastrian god of evil, darkness, and ignorance.[8] In the Septuagint, the Hebrew ha-Satan in Job and Zechariah is translated by the Greek word diabolos (slanderer), the same word in the Greek New Testament from which the English word "devil" is derived.[30] Where satan is used to refer to human enemies in the Hebrew Bible, such as Hadad the Edomite and Rezon the Syrian, the word is left untranslated but transliterated in the Greek as satan, a neologism in Greek.[3


On NT stories, there are 6 dying/rising savior demigods who rose (sometimes on the 3rd day) who baptized members were saved (got into afterlife) and are confirmed to pre-date Jesus.

Scholar R Purvoe has a peer-reviewd word demonstrating Acts is fiction:
https://www.amazon.com/Mystery-Acts-Unraveling-Its-Story/dp/159815012X

and so on...

Refuted a million times . This is old stuff .

 

[Colt]

Licence to be a tyrant, or a criminal, or worse?

Why would you say that?

 

[oldbadger]

Why would you say that?

Salvation by faith alone? Licence to be s tyrant?
Are you having difficulty with that sole equation?
Thing is, the Salvation-by-Fsith Christians trawled this from Paul's letters, didn't they? Jesus would have had nothing to do with such an idea.

 

[Colt]

Salvation by faith alone? Licence to be s tyrant?
Are you having difficulty with that sole equation?
Thing is, the Salvation-by-Fsith Christians trawled this from Paul's letters, didn't they? Jesus would have had nothing to do with such an idea.

To the contrary, Jesus taught that faith in his Father is salvation.

 

[kjw47]

Some seem to object to the exclusive claims of Christianity. That the Gospel is the ONLY way ,that Jesus is the ONLY way to heaven ,that by believing that he died for all our sins , was buried and rose again . That this alone is the only option there is to heaven and eternal life .
But I believe all our claims are exclusive .Even the claim ' all roads lead to the same God " claim ,this is exclusive and rules out the individual claim of another .
Often its made to sound ' tolerant ' ( The new fashionable, buzz word )
" All truth is relative " again, another exclusive truth claim.
" Thats true for you , but not true for me " hmmm lol ?
I used to believe that all religions were just ' sign posts ' to the same goal . Just different ways to express or reach the same goal " Again this is a exclusive claim.
Thoughts?

Jesus teaches--Those living ( now) to do his Fathers will, get to enter his kingdom.( Matt 7:21) Few on earth know the Fathers will, let alone live by it. Not all roads lead to the same God.

 

[oldbadger]

To the contrary, Jesus taught that faith in his Father is salvation.

Which is why you haven't quoted what he actually said.
I think that salvation-through-faith Christianity is very dangerous colter, I do, not as dangerous as 'predestination-Christianity', but still dangerous enough. I read too many Christians who mix their faith with their politics, and the majority that I read are well in to mammon, object to any kind of social services within the community like free healthcare, education and subsistence for minors ....... and on.... and on.

So please, tell me more about how salvation through faith alone has guided your life and politics.... are you any different from the average that I have read about?

 

[joelr]

You may be right.
In fact, every human has the right to fool himself when he sees a robot in action and say its has no maker in case he cannot find out any sign of its maker other than his robot only.

Sure if one sees a robot they would have to fool themselves if they wanted to think it arose from natural laws. We have only ever seen robots created by humans.
But with humans we have a ridiculous amount of evidence of how we evolved from simple life and then there are many lines of evidence with organic chemistry and self-replicating chemicals. So evidence supports life arising from the laws of physics. So this analogy doesn't apply.

So my crucial point was never to just believe there is a Will/Energy behind my existence (a very complex system, not just a mere robot). Instead, it was to KNOW it within myself (not from any other source). It is somehow like analyzing the code of a robot to visualize, as possible, the nature of its maker; mainly if the maker has inserted in it some info about himself.

Now, you have likely the impression that I knew the One Will/Energy which is behind my existence as being one of the various gods that are offered on the world's table. Nope, none of these gods reflects the image of my Creator I have in me. Here are some main points of the God I know:

[1] My Creator doesn't need imposing on humans any rules to obey and/or rituals to observe. The embedded instincts are enough to guide every person and let his living flesh play its role(s) for which it is created. Thanks to these instincts, almost all humans in the world knew how to be gathered in various well-organized groups (controlled by rules; social, religious and political).

[2] This One Will/Energy cannot be of a one-being only. Otherwise, this one being would have no other choice but to play the selfish powerful ruler/king over its creatures. It happens that I can't be selfish even if I have all the means to impose my will on some others.

[3] My Creator doesn't need my worship and praise in public. The relationship with my Creator is strictly a personal one.

It happens, to my big surprise, that this image in me was revealed already by Jesus only! (on the today's Gospel).

Please note that when I talk to someone, I just say what I have in mind. And, no matter the reply of the other side is, I always gain from it more insight about the real world (the way it is created) to confirm what I know about its reality.

All I see as your evidence is you "know it within yourself". I have heard members of Islam, Hinduism and several other religions say they use this same intuition to confirm that not only is God real but their specific version is the correct one.
Since they are obviously not all correct we know that people can feel this way and still be wrong.

Because you have an idea of what a creator God must be like and ancient stories happen to have similarities does not confirm that it's true.

It's also likely that had you read Vedic scripture you also would have found similarities and then become Hindu.

Also I do not understand the contradiction about a creator God who doesn't need worship and praise yet then you believe in Jesus? Yahweh needs a ridiculous amount of praise and worship, the first several commandments are about this. More important than the golden rule?????

You are all over the map here.

 

[joelr]

Of course certain historians are not backing ' myths ' . They would be out of a job .

You are demonstrably wrong and do not understand the scientific method as applied to history and archeology. When you have to imply conspiracy theories this is the sign that you are holding false beliefs that you refuse to let go of.
Historians do not just pander to popular ideas they produce work that has to pass peer-review and can be examined and scrutinized by anyone. Books and papers are available for all to see.

No one in science or history cares about what is or isn't a myth. They care about evidence. Had Carrier found evidence that there was a historical Jesus he would have included it and made it part of his analysis. Bart Ehrman began studying NT history to be able to confirm to people his beliefs when questioned. He simply found the beliefs do not have any reasonable evidence but there is endless evidence that it's the same as all religions, stories made up by people.

 

[joelr]

Refuted a million times . This is old stuff .

Ha, yes refuted a million times exactly like you just did. Apologists with head in the sand just denying facts. I don't even know which specific thing you are talking about (clearly neither do you) but it's been consensus scholarship for a long time that the Persian occupation is when the Judahite religion was re-branded as a monotheistic religion and added many of the Persian myths to the movement.

The scholar who discovered the Persian myths date to around 1500 BC and include messianic prophecies, resurrection and many other elements that are known to have not been part of the Torah culture is Mary Boyce. Not only has her work not been debunked "1 million times" but it has never been shown to be wrong.
Mary Boyce - Wikipedia

Page 29 of her book Zoroastrians: Their Religious Beliefs and Practices is where the quote is from

At 3:20 OT Professor Francesca Stavrakopoulou explains much of this here:

As far as the Hellenistic elements it's also standard scholarship that several historians have written books on. At that time all of the mystery religions were adding Hellenistic elements and forming new religions. Many had resurrecting savior Gods who went through a passion and members were baptized into the cult.
Phoenician religion + Hellenistic = Bacchic Mysteries,
Phrgyian + Hellenistic = Mysteries of Attis and many more. Jewish + Hellenistic = Christianity.
These are known facts that have not been "debunked". Clearly some people deny them for personal belief reasons.

Petra Pakkenan - Interpreting Early Hellenistic Religion is a good source.


So last post was that scholars all lie because otherwise they lose their job and now we switch to " it's been debunked". Two completely different tactics, both lacking evidence and plainly wrong.
But the initial response was to attack the idea that one should listen to scholars and actually attempt to gain information because the truth is all "in the book". Which could be the worst of the three delusions because I could take any book and make that claim. It's the same thing done in Islam, Mormonism, JW and many other groups.

 

[joelr]

Another great post, joelr. Christians don't want "THE" truth, they only want their truth--which is anything that agrees with their church-taught notions that Jesus is God died for our sins. The real truth is easily demonstrated to them but Christians' only reaction to it is

So true. This thread is the most extreme example I have seen.

 

[John1.12]

Ha, yes refuted a million times exactly like you just did. Apologists with head in the sand just denying facts. I don't even know which specific thing you are talking about (clearly neither do you) but it's been consensus scholarship for a long time that the Persian occupation is when the Judahite religion was re-branded as a monotheistic religion and added many of the Persian myths to the movement.

The scholar who discovered the Persian myths date to around 1500 BC and include messianic prophecies, resurrection and many other elements that are known to have not been part of the Torah culture is Mary Boyce. Not only has her work not been debunked "1 million times" but it has never been shown to be wrong.
Mary Boyce - Wikipedia

Page 29 of her book Zoroastrians: Their Religious Beliefs and Practices is where the quote is from

At 3:20 OT Professor Francesca Stavrakopoulou explains much of this here:

As far as the Hellenistic elements it's also standard scholarship that several historians have written books on. At that time all of the mystery religions were adding Hellenistic elements and forming new religions. Many had resurrecting savior Gods who went through a passion and members were baptized into the cult.
Phoenician religion + Hellenistic = Bacchic Mysteries,
Phrgyian + Hellenistic = Mysteries of Attis and many more. Jewish + Hellenistic = Christianity.
These are known facts that have not been "debunked". Clearly some people deny them for personal belief reasons.

Petra Pakkenan - Interpreting Early Hellenistic Religion is a good source.


So last post was that scholars all lie because otherwise they lose their job and now we switch to " it's been debunked". Two completely different tactics, both lacking evidence and plainly wrong.
But the initial response was to attack the idea that one should listen to scholars and actually attempt to gain information because the truth is all "in the book". Which could be the worst of the three delusions because I could take any book and make that claim. It's the same thing done in Islam, Mormonism, JW and many other groups.

On hols for 6 days now , back later . Godbless

 

[Colt]

Which is why you haven't quoted what he actually said.
I think that salvation-through-faith Christianity is very dangerous colter, I do, not as dangerous as 'predestination-Christianity', but still dangerous enough. I read too many Christians who mix their faith with their politics, and the majority that I read are well in to mammon, object to any kind of social services within the community like free healthcare, education and subsistence for minors ....... and on.... and on.

So please, tell me more about how salvation through faith alone has guided your life and politics.... are you any different from the average that I have read about?

Faith is more than belief, it’s a decided way of life. Love and service to others is a natural byproduct of doing Gods will. The inherent responsibility that comes with being a child of God informs my political worldview.

 

[KerimF]

Sure if one sees a robot they would have to fool themselves if they wanted to think it arose from natural laws. We have only ever seen robots created by humans.
But with humans we have a ridiculous amount of evidence of how we evolved from simple life and then there are many lines of evidence with organic chemistry and self-replicating chemicals. So evidence supports life arising from the laws of physics. So this analogy doesn't apply.

You are right in case you see your instincts that guide you, with or without your knowledge, have nothing to do with robotic programming.
On the other hand, not in vain, some robots are made now with Artificial Intelligence to let them act, as possible, like human beings.

All I see as your evidence is you "know it within yourself". I have heard members of Islam, Hinduism and several other religions say they use this same intuition to confirm that not only is God real but their specific version is the correct one.

You are right again, this is why everyone of them has no real reason to seriously listen to you or me

Since they are obviously not all correct we know that people can feel this way and still be wrong.

I am afraid that each of them is correct relative to his priorities in life for which he is created. This fact is EXACTLY the same like you see yourself correct with whatever you believe and disbelieve.

Because you have an idea of what a creator God must be like and ancient stories happen to have similarities does not confirm that it's true.

Well, just to your knowledge, I was born in a Catholic family. Naturally, my school (a French one) was Catholic. When I became old enough to perceive my unique existence, I found out that what is known as Church’s teachings were illogical to me. And since these teachings are supposed to reflect Jesus teachings on the Gospel, I decided to read it attentively and prove, to myself in the least and for good, that Jesus too has nothing to do in my life. To my big surprise, not only the two teachings are different but also opposite in crucial points.
I don’t think you like hearing more than this

It's also likely that had you read Vedic scripture you also would have found similarities and then become Hindu.

If Jesus tells me to observe any sort of rituals (as it is the case in all known religions/beliefs), I would see the Gospel as another book on which an imaginary character teaches, with great words, how to apply the human flesh instincts in a group. Such imaginary character which could be made famous in the name of a god is very important/useful for some people looking for money, fame and/or authority.
I guess you know that Politics (the art of controlling large groups of people) was applied thru various religions first.

Also I do not understand the contradiction about a creator God who doesn't need worship and praise yet then you believe in Jesus? Yahweh needs a ridiculous amount of praise and worship, the first several commandments are about this. More important than the golden rule?????

It seems you just know how ‘formal’ Christians are. So you also think, since you mentioned Yahweh, that Jesus also approves the teachings which were addressed to Jews when humans were rather primitive (the kids of humanity). In other words, if Jesus tells me to worship, praise or even obey my God (or him), he would have nothing to do in my reality. To my big surprise, Jesus advises me to ‘Love’ my God instead. I hope you know already that living true love towards anyone is strictly a personal free will and it cannot be true if commanded by a rule. But the difference is too big just for a human who has also a living soul in him. I mean; it is impossible for someone who has a living flesh only to take care of to see any difference between ‘love’ and... 'worship, praise and obedience'.

 

[KerimF]

Love and service to others is a natural byproduct of doing Gods will.

Yes. And the differences among humans in this respect are to how far each of them can live it; starting from the chemical love up to loving enemies (without the need for self-defense as Jesus did).

 

[oldbadger]

Faith is more than belief, it’s a decided way of life. Love and service to others is a natural byproduct of doing Gods will. The inherent responsibility that comes with being a child of God informs my political worldview.

If you support 'love and service to others' then your Christianity is different to many other Christians who do not believe in community support for all.
One point.
We are all either children of God, children of Nature or children of Fate.
I'm a child of nature because I'm a Deist.

 

[KerimF]

If you support 'love and service to others' then your Christianity is different to many other Christians who do not believe in community support for all.
One point.
We are all either children of God, children of Nature or children of Fate.
I'm a child of nature because I'm a Deist.

By design, any act made without true love (following the natural embedded instincts) will end up to the state of void (the state before Creation). Only the joy of living the unconditional love towards all others (opposing the natural instincts) is eternal. How? This is another topic which could be titled "After Death Doesn't Have to Be a Mystery'.

 

[oldbadger]

By design, any act made without true love (following the natural embedded instincts) will end up to the state of void (the state before Creation). Only the joy of living the unconditional love towards all others (opposing the natural instincts) is eternal. How? This is another topic which could be titled "After Death Doesn't Have to Be a Mystery'.

Who lives in a state of unconditional love to all others? Who?

And how do you know that this state leafs to some after death condition?

 

[KerimF]

Who lives in a state of unconditional love to all others? Who?

I thought the answer is obvious
If I couldn't live this state, I wouldn't talk about it in the first place.
And it is okay, if you can't believe me because, truth be told, I also didn't have the chance (I am over 70), as you didn't, to meet or know someone who lives it too.

It was supposed that I have to see myself a weird person, if not abnormal.
But it happens that I am not unique in this. You know... also Jesus didn't defend himself when it was time for Him to be captured and then condemned to death. Then, on the cross, He clearly forgave all who were behind his penalty of death and enjoyed it, directly or indirectly.
You may say: "But Jesus is not real".
But I am real (to me in the least)... though not necessarily to you or anyone who didn't know me in person.
Anyway, should I see myself a weird person just because most humans on earth, if not all, have no interest in what was written about someone known as Jesus Christ?
Should I cease believing that Pythagoras theorem of the right angle is real and useful till I get all the necessary evidences which prove me that Pythagoras did exist?!

And how do you know that this state leafs to some after death condition?

This is a good question... which I also asked to myself many decades ago.
Only when I was able finding out its logical answer my life became rather stable despite whatever situation I had to face and whatever is happening in the world, around me and abroad.
It seems to me from what you wrote, so I may be wrong, that your best logical answer is that you will return back, at death, to the state of void; the state before your birth. This answer is not bad at all in case you are sure that you have just a living flesh to take of (in others words, it is out of question.to you not to follow its instincts of survival).

 

[metis]

Gandhi had a comment of those who believe that one is saved by faith alone, as he then said that all too many believed that and then believed they could say or do anything they wanted. It seems that he was right on that.

 

[KerimF]

Gandhi had a comment of those who believe that one is saved by faith alone, as he then said that all too many believed that and then believed they could say or do anything they wanted. It seems that he was right on that.

If Ghanhi said this, I fully agree with him on it.

If you will have time to read my posts you will find out that I can't have a blind faith because it happened that I have to be a realistic man of reason. Having faith may be needed just at the first stage of learning.
A little kid needs to have faith in his parents if he likes to start discovering the world thru their experiences, instead of starting from zero.
A Student needs to have faith in his teachers if he likes to learn science (or else) also thru their experiences in their field of studies and professional work perhaps.

Jesus already pointed out this fact about those who build their houses on a rock and those who build them on sand. In fact, there is no easier than talking about Jesus Love in a speech or meeting. But only a few people around the world can live the unconditional love towards all others as revealed very clearly by Jesus {Matthew 5:44-45}. Don't you know why?