Can we change our mind about what we believe?

[joelr]

Do I? Why would that be?

“CAMPBELL: The ancient myths were designed to harmonize the mind and the body. The mind can ramble off in
strange ways and want things that the body does not want. The myths and rites were means of putting the mind in accord with the body and the way of life in accord with the way that nature dictates.

MOYERS: So these old stories live in us?

CAMPBELL: They do indeed. The stages of human development are the same today as they were in the ancient times. As a child, you are brought up in a world of discipline, of obedience, and you are dependent on others. All this has to be transcended when you come to maturity, so that you can live not in dependency but with self-responsible authority. If you can't cross that threshold, you have the basis for neuroses. Then comes the one after you have gained your world, of yielding it -- the crisis of dismissal, disengagement.

MOYERS: And ultimately death?

CAMPBELL: And ultimately death. That's the ultimate disengagement. So myth has to serve both aims, that of inducting the young person into the life of his world -- that's the function of the folk idea -- then disengaging him. The folk idea unshells the elementary idea, which guides you to your own inward life.

MOYERS: And[…]”

CAMPBELL: The tradition in India, for instance, of actually changing your whole way of dress, even changing your
name, as you pass from one stage to another. When I retired from teaching, I knew that I had to create a new way of life, and I changed my manner of thinking about my life, just in terms of that notion -- moving out of the sphere of achievement into the sphere of enjoyment and appreciation and relaxing to the wonder of it all.


Excerpt From: Joseph Campbell. “The power of myth.” Apple Books.


Hunting cultures have myths that help them deal with killing as a way of life, myths help with fear of death, explain the passages of life, stages of life, read Campbell, he explains it well, it's complex. People are also inspired by the hero's journey which Jesus follows.


“MOYERS: What about this idea of good and evil in mythology, of life as a conflict between the forces of darkness and the forces of light?

CAMPBELL: That is a Zoroastrian idea, which has come over into Judaism and Christianity.”

Excerpt From: Joseph Campbell. “The power of myth.” Apple Books.

..ditto?

Hindusim is complex, you have to study Advaita Vedanta.

“Now, I came to this idea of bliss because in Sanskrit, which is the great spiritual language of the world, there are three terms that represent the brink, the jumping-off place to the ocean of transcendence: Sat, Chit, Ananda. The word "Sat" means being. "Chit" means consciousness. "Ananda" means bliss or rapture. I thought, "I don't know whether my consciousness is proper consciousness or not; I don't know whether what I know of my being is my proper being or not; but I do know where my rapture is. So let me hang on to rapture, and that will bring me both my consciousness and my being." I think it worked.

MOYERS: Do we ever know the truth? Do we ever find it?

CAMPBELL: Each person can have his own depth, experience, and some conviction of being in touch with his own sat-chit-ananda, his own being through consciousness and bliss. The religious people tell us we really won't experience bliss until we die and go to heaven. But I believe in having as much as you can of this experience while you are still alive.

”

Excerpt From: Joseph Campbell. “The power of myth.” Apple Books.

Of course it isn't .. it is about WHAT was reported to have been said, and why.

And WHAT was said was Persian and Jewish mythology, theology and local Arab ideas. Not one new thing. Variants were also found, PROVING this was a work in progress.

..but you believe neither.

Not without evidence. Every religion makes claims.

I've seen this nonsense before .. you read some English translation of prose/idiom and think
you've found a flaw.
You'll be telling me that the sun doesn't fall into a muddy spring, next.

I see the word it's derived from "falaka", the text is giving the moon and sun similar orbits, the apologetics are ridiculous. we did not know the earth went around the sun until Copernicus and that is EXACTLY why it does not clearly state the sun and moon are not the same, the moon orbits the earth and the earth orbits the sun.
Look, I just said it. It wasn't said clear back then because they did not know and there is no god telling them secrets.

But I don't care about that. The text says the moon stood still, it thinks angels are real, the OT, a Mesopotamian and Egyptian mythology is real, Moses, a literary creation, is an actual person, as well as Noah, a made up person when re-writing the older flood stories for their new nation. They don't know this is myth.

It thinks Jesus wasn't a Hellenistic creation but that is just corruption yet the entire NT is a Hellenistic document in content, form, theology, and any other way.
There are many scientific mentions yet ALL are exactly what the Greeks came up with and they were known to have been exploring the Greek science. So god wanted to give science but he kept it to Greek ideas that were basically wrong? Nope.

There is no chance this is revelations. There is no chance revelations are real. Even worse is a theistic God is not demonstrated. Ever.
Never mind a super angry deity who calls his own people "liars" yet cannot bother to tell the leaders of the Christian church. What kind of evil sadistic being would take people who were actually trying their best to worship, devoting their lives, building churches, living the gospel, who somehow were mislead and then go to a foreign people and bad-mouth them like a jealous dictator? Absolutely absurd.
And we know that early versions and variants were found, showing this was also one of those what you like to call "conspiracy". But it's just a mythology to be fair.

In how many posts you have yet to provide good evidence for anything?

 

[muhammad_isa]

The dying/rising savior demigod character is a Hellenistic trend going around that region. Plain historical facts..

I'm well aware of that..

All Mystery religions have personal savior deities

- All saviors
- all son/daughter, never the supreme God (including Mithriasm)
- all undergo a passion (struggle) patheon
- all obtain victory over death which they share with followers
- all have stories set on earth
- none actually existed
- Is Jesus the exception and based on a real Jewish teacher or is it all made up?

It is recognized by historians that Jesus was an actual person who was known as
"King of the Jews".

Mark was probably not creating a religion, he was a schooled writer applying his skillset on a new myth going around..

Right .. and it was "going around" because Jesus actually existed.
That is not to say that everything he wrote was accurate, but re. the quotes of Jesus,
not far off.

This is literally Lord of the Rings level mythology..

Get over yourself !

What is Mormonism, because you don't believe that?

What is Jehovas Witness. What is Scientology, Hinduism (all 5 versions), Sikh, Greek religions, Roman religions, Native American religions, South American religions, BAhai....??????

We are not discussing sectarian belief, so why don't you start another thread on Mormonism,
or Jehovahism" etc. etc.

 

[muhammad_isa]

..And WHAT was said was Persian and Jewish mythology, theology and local Arab ideas. Not one new thing. Variants were also found, PROVING this was a work in progress..

It does not prove anything at all .. you only think it proves something, because you start off with the assumption that it is all bunkum in the first place !

I see the word it's derived from "falaka", the text is giving the moon and sun similar orbits, the apologetics are ridiculous..

It doesn't matter what I say, as you will interpret verses in the manner that suits you..
..including those explanations you get from anti-Islamic websites.

One thing .. the sun and the moon do have orbits, but they do not share the same one.
..and it doesn't really matter what ignorant people believed in the past .. we live in the present.

we did not know the earth went around the sun until Copernicus and that is EXACTLY why it does not clearly state the sun and moon are not the same, the moon orbits the earth and the earth orbits the sun..

It comes back to language and idiom once more..
The Qur'an was revealed in classical Arabic .. in language of the time, that people could understand.
It's not supposed to be a lesson in science !

..There is no chance revelations are real..

Purely your opinion, which is not worth a jot .. you have extreme views,
and make unprovable statements like the above.

..In how many posts you have yet to provide good evidence for anything?

I'm not in the business of proving anything about a particular faith.
I explain my understandings, and people are free to believe what they like.

 

[Muffled]

If it didn't make sense, I wouldn't follow it.


..but it doesn't make sense .. what actually IS a "demi-god son"?

I believe one thing it is not is Jesus. A demi-god son comes from a physical father. Jesus does not have a physical father.

 

[joelr]

I'm well aware of that..

That's a start.

It is recognized by historians that Jesus was an actual person who was known as
"King of the Jews".

HA HA HA!, Suddenly you are quoting historians, who all this time are corrupt, bias, atheists? Wow, all over the map, like most apologists.

There are at least 30 sitting scholars who recognize mythicism is plausible now.
No historian says Jesus was a human Rabbi who was considered King of the Jews. NO HISTORIAN EVER.
That is the worst attempt at made-up history ever.

Our first mention of Jesus is Paul who only knows a ghost Jesus.
The Gospels are not considered historical. He was believed (if real) to be one of the MANY Joshua Messiahs who Josephus mentions.
That translates to Jesus Christ.
There were many Joshua Messiahs (God's Messiah) running around telling of the end times myth. There was no "King" of the Jews among these Rabbi.
The Jews didn't seem to notice him at all never mind "king"?????
The Talmud has a Jesus stoned and hung, 100 years earlier. Not the "King of Jews".


Messiahs in the Time of Jesus


Josephus mentions a dozen or more “messiah” figures beginning with Hezekiah/Ezekias c. 45 BCE whom the young Herod defeated whom he variously labels as “brigands” (ληστής) or “imposters” (γόης)—though he calls Judas the Galilean a “wise man” (σοφιστής) and credits him with the founding a the “fourth philosophy” (Jewish Antiquities18.23). Several of these figures are said to have worn the “diadem” (διάδημα)—which indicates royal or “messianic” claims and aspirations. Philo defines γόηςas one who cloaks himself as a prophet but is an imposter (Special Laws 1.315), compare 2 Timothy 3:13. The following list could be expanded but it includes those who are most obviously named and identified. This does not include, of course, the Teacher of Righteousness at Qumran, John the Baptizer, Jesus, or James his brother, who represented scions of the tribes of Levi and Judah or both. And then we could add Barabbas, mentioned in Mark 15:7, and the two crucified “brigands,” (ληστής), one on the right and the other on the left of Jesus (Mark 15:27).


• Hezekiah/Ezekias, defeated by Herod in 47 BCE (Jewish War 1.204-205)


• Judas (aka Theudas) son of Ezekias, 4 BCE/death of Herod (Jewish War 2.56; Acts 5:36)


• Simon of Perea, 4 BCE/death of Herod (Jewish War 2.57-59)


• Athronges the Shepherd, 4 BCE/death of Herod (Jewish War 2:60-65)


• Judas the Galilean, 6 CE/Archaelaus removed (Jewish War 2.118)


• Theudas, c. 44 CE (Jewish Antiquities 20.97; Acts 5:36?)


• James and Simon, c. 46 CE, sons of Judas the Galilean, crucified by Tiberius Alexander, nephew of Philo, who was Procurator 46-48 CE (Jewish Antiquities 20.102)


• “The Egyptian” c. 50s CE (Jewish Antiquities 20.169-171; Jewish War 2.261-263; Acts 21:38)


• Eleazar son of Dineus/Deinaeus, c. 52 CE under Felix (Jewish War 2.253; Jewish Antiquities 20:161)


• Menachem, son of Judas the Galilean, 66 CE (Jewish War 2:433-448)


• Eleazar son of Jairus (ben Yair), commander of Masada, was of the family (γένος) of Menachem (Jewish War 2.447)

Right .. and it was "going around" because Jesus actually existed.

Holy smoke. Hellenism was going around. Jesus was the LAST savior deity influenced by the Greek religion? It was around since 300 BCE, the Jesus story isn't because "Jesus"??????? It's a trend, seen in previous religions? How many times do I have to show historical evidence?

You cannot even be reading my posts.
Jesus was the savior in the Jewish version. A late version.


Mystery cults, come from Greek religions. Every culture that was conquered by Greeks, Egyptians, Persians, Thracians, all took the Mystery cult theology and added it to their local religion and came up with the Mystery religions.



- Petra Pakkanen, Interpreting Early Hellenistic Religion (1996)


- Four big trends in religion in the centuries leading up to Christianity


- Christianity conforms to all four

examples of national religions influenced by Hellenism and producing a new religion:


Elusinian Mysteries = Mycenaean + Hellenistic


Bacchic Mysteries = Phoenician + Hellenistic


Mysteries of Attis and Cybele = Phrygian + Hellenistic


Mysteries of Baal = Anatolian + Hellenistic


Mysteries of Mithras = Persian + Hellenistic


Mysteries of Isis and Osiris = Egyptian + Hellenistic


Christian Mysteries = Jewish + Hellenistic


The Jewish version was Jesus and was the LAST. GREEK HELLENISM WAS TRENDING?


As Dr Tabor points out,


The New Testament comes out of a wholly different milieu. First, it is part and parcel of the broad changes in religious thought that we know as "Hellenization."It is characterized by a vast and expanded dualistic cosmos, an emphasis on immortality and personal salvation,i.e.,one scaping this world fo ra better heavenly life. At the same time, and to be more specific,it is absolutely and completely dominated by an apocalyptic world view of things, whereby all will be soon resolved by the decisive intervention of God, the End of the Age, the last greatJudgment, and the eternalKingdom of God. In addition, the Christology that develops, even in the first century, is thoroughly"Hellenistic," with Jesus the human transformed into the pre-existent, divine, Son of God, who sits at the right hand of God and is Lord of the cosmos.The whole complex of ideas about multiple levels of heavens, fate, angels, demons, miracles and magic abound.It is as if all the questions that the HebrewBible only begins to explore - questions about theodicy, justice, human purpose, history, death, sin - are all suddenly answered with a loud and resounding " Yes ! " There is little, if any struggle left . There are few haunting questions, and no genuine tragedy or meaningless suffering.All is guaranteed it will shortly be worked out.


Of course, various attempts are made to reinterpret this early Christianity for our time. usually in terms of ethics or some exis -


tential core of truth . But early Christianity rests on two essential points, both of which resist easy demythologozation: it is a religious movement built on apoctalyptic view of history and an evaluation of Jesus as a Hellenistic deity, i.e., a pre-existent divine Savior God in whom all ultimate meaning rests. If thes eare unacceptable in the modem world, or incompatible with the fundamental Hebrew view of things, then the whole system becomes difficult, if not superfluous.


James Tabor


Reflections on the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament

That is not to say that everything he wrote was accurate, but re. the quotes of Jesus,
not far off.

No, they are mostly made up, taken from older sources. But thanks for even more made-up history. This is all making sense suddenly.

couple examples,


Mark 15.24: “They part his garments among them, casting lots upon them.”


Psalm 22:18: “They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon them.”


Mark 15.29-31: “And those who passed by blasphemed him, shaking their heads and saying, ‘…Save yourself…’ and mocked him, saying ‘He who saved others cannot save himself!’ ”


Psalm 22.7-8: “All those who see me mock me and give me lip, shaking their head, saying ‘He expected the lord to protect him, so let the lord save him if he likes.’ ”


Mark 15.34: “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”


Psalm 22.1: “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”



Deut. 8.2 — Israel was in the wilderness for forty years.
Matt. 4.2 — Jesus is in the wilderness for forty days.

Exodus 16.2-8 — Israel was tempted by hunger and fed upon manna.
Matt. 4.2-4 — A hungry Jesus is tempted to turn stones into bread.

Exodus 17.1-3 — Israel was tempted to put God to the test.
Matt. 4.6-7 — The same thing happens to Jesus.


Exodus 32 — Israel was lured into idolatry.
Matt. 4.8-10 — The devil confronts Jesus with the same temptations to worship something other than Israel’s God (Satan himself).


Matthew thus invented a narrative here, putting words in Jesus’ mouth, to create a literarily symbolic story involving obviously fictional events. This is exactly the same kind of literary invention that we saw employed in Mark’s Gospel, where events are created to serve an allegorical purpose and often stem from emulating a previous mythical event (as in the legend of Moses).

Get over yourself !

I think it's up there with Lord of the Rings, you don't think so? I'll give another example, there are many. Matthew crafted the
crucifixion narrative using chiastic form, the beginning and end reverse. Real events don't do that, it's only found in fiction.

Matthew also carefully crafted the crucifixion narrative specifically to be more elegantly chiastic than Mark’s version:

A – Passover and crucifixion (26.1-2)
B – Priests plot (26.3-5)
C – Jesus anointed for burial (26.6-13)
D – Preparations: Judas enlisted (26.14-16); Passover prepared (26.17-19)
E – Judas exposed (26.20-25)
F – Lord’s supper [a mock death] inaugurated (26.26-28)
G – Nazirite vow made (26.29)
H – Removal to Olivet (26.30)
I – Abandonment (26.31-35)
J – Jesus asks God not to be released (26.36-46)
K – Judas betrays Jesus (26.47-56)
L – Trial before Sanhedrin (26.57-68)
M – Denial of Peter (26.69-75)
L – Sanhedrin delivers Jesus to Pilate (27.1-2)
K – Judas hangs himself (27.3-10)
J – Pilate does not release Jesus (27.11-26)
I – Mockery (27.27-31)
H – Removal to Golgotha (27.32-33)
G – Nazirite vow fulfilled (27.34)
F – Crucifixion (27.35-44) and death (27.45-50)
E – Temple exposed (27.51)
D – Results: Jesus’ lordship confirmed (27.52-54); the least are faithful (27.55-56)
C – Jesus buried (27.57-61)
B – Priests plot (27.62-66)
A – Passover and resurrection (28.1-10)

LOTR uses similar devices, they are comparable.


But if you really want to dig in, this is taken from Carrier's work. Excellent mythology, crafted exactly as myth and clearly made up from other sources and not historical at all.

The Gospels as Allegorical Myth, Part I of 4: Mark

Previously, I’ve written about the historicity of Jesus, and mentioned how the most recent analysis, in Richard Carrier’s On the Historicity of Jesus (the first comprehensive, academica…

lagevondissen.wordpress.com

The Gospels as Allegorical Myth, Part 2 of 4: Matthew

In the first post I wrote in this series, I mentioned many of the elements from Richard Carrier’s analysis of the Gospels, that show that they are quite obviously allegorical myth and fiction…

lagevondissen.wordpress.com

The Gospels as Allegorical Myth, Part 3 of 4: Luke

In the first two posts in this series, we looked at various elements of Richard Carrier’s analysis of the first two Gospels found in the New Testament, specifically The Gospel According to Ma…

lagevondissen.wordpress.com

We are not discussing sectarian belief, so why don't you start another thread on Mormonism,
or Jehovahism" etc. etc.

Don't dodge the question. If Christianity is a "conspiracy" then that makes every religion ever the same. Because they are all made up.
So are you calling all religions "conspiracys"?
As I explained (which you failed to comment on) myth has purpose.

 

[joelr]

It does not prove anything at all .. you only think it proves something, because you start off with the assumption that it is all bunkum in the first place !

No I look for evidence. We have evidence of variants, early versions, a long timeline and no evidence of God, angels, supernatural realm, revelations, but we do have evidence for people writing myths claiming to be inspired by god.
In fact in those times the phrase was used far more loosely. Like if you had an inspiration you could say it was from god. SO it wasn't even considered a full lie.

So the evidence definitely shows this is likely a man made thing. Scholars who looked carefully also agree and have much more detailed arguments.
We cannot prove Hercules wasn't real but we can have reasonable evidence. Same here.

It doesn't matter what I say, as you will interpret verses in the manner that suits you..
..including those explanations you get from anti-Islamic websites.

The orbit of the solar system includes the earth. When a text says the orbit of the sun and moon, astronomy hadn't been invented and the sun and moon track across the sky, it's not hard to see what the writers intended.
They did not know the earth revolved around the sun. In fact if a deity told them it would have been HUGE and made a big deal. It would say it. It doesn't, so they probably didn't know.

One thing .. the sun and the moon do have orbits, but they do not share the same one.
..and it doesn't really matter what ignorant people believed in the past .. we live in the present.

You claim these are revelations from a god so it does matter. No evidence that a god spoke exists here or anywhere. This is knowledge people had.

It comes back to language and idiom once more..
The Qur'an was revealed in classical Arabic .. in language of the time, that people could understand.
It's not supposed to be a lesson in science !

Except the apologists don't know that:

The Quran’s Scientific Miracles: Evidence of Its Divine Origins​

However, out of all the world religions, Islam complements science the most, contrary to popular belief. In fact, science strengthens faith as far as Islam is concerned. For instance, the Quran contains scientific knowledge that was not discovered by science until recently, a clear proof of its divine origins

That is all a snow job. Everything is Greek science, not one new original fact comes from the Quran.

Purely your opinion, which is not worth a jot .. you have extreme views,

Consensus opinions of scholarship may be extreme to fundamentalists but it's what the evidence presents.

Please, demonstrate where we have proven revelations are real. Not one revelation ever said anything new. Same wisdom, jealousy, worship me or else, no new math or science. Fake. If my opinion is worth nothing you have a problem because you haven't debunked one single thing I have said all this time, got schooled on history and rely on apologetics nonsense.

and make unprovable statements like the above.

You also continue to rely on a fallacy -

Unfalsifiability​

Description: Confidently asserting that a theory or hypothesis is true or false even though the theory or hypothesis cannot possibly be contradicted by an observation or the outcome of any physical experiment, usually without strong evidence or good reasons.

Making unfalsifiable claims is a way to leave the realm of rational discourse, since unfalsifiable claims are often faith-based, and not founded on evidence and reason.

Which you often do. I have to say it AGAIN, we cannot PROVE Hercules didn't exist, but evidence says he did not.

I'm not in the business of proving anything about a particular faith.

HA! THEN, you go and do it again, rely on ANOTHER FALLACY?!?!?!?!

I didn't say "prove" anything did I?

I said - "..In how many posts you have yet to provide good evidence for anything?"

PROVIDE GOOD EVIDENCE.
When you cannot answer the question you simply change the question to a question about unfalsifiable claims, which I didn't ask and wouldn't because it's a fallacy and proves nothing.

I explain my understandings,

Which are usually incorrect, here we have make believe history and fallacies.

and people are free to believe what they like.

Uh, freedom of belief is not in question. I have said all along, believe what you like. So this is another strawman.
The question is, is it true, the evidence says NO.

Looks like your response to the mythology explanations went missing? You asked about myth, I gave a small sample of Campbell to no response.
I'll post some more Cambell anyways:

"

“One of the most interesting histories of what comes of rejecting science we may see in Islam, which in the beginning received, accepted, and even developed the classical legacy. For some five or six rich centuries there is an impressive Islamic record of scientific thought, experiment, and research, particularly in medicine. But then, alas! the authority of the general community, the Sunna, the consensus—which Mohammed the Prophet had declared would always be right—cracked down. The Word of God in the Koran was the only source and vehicle of truth. Scientific thought led to 'loss of belief in the origin of the world and in the Creator.' And so it was that, just when the light of Greek learning was beginning to be carried from Islam to Europe—from circa 1100 onward—Islamic science and medicine came to a standstill and went dead....”​

 

[muhammad_isa]

Don't dodge the question. If Christianity is a "conspiracy" then that makes every religion ever the same. Because they are all made up.

Your logic is severely flawed!
Each creed needs to be examined individually..

 

[muhammad_isa]

No I look for evidence.

Yes .. and you interpret the evidence with your pre-defined supposition that
all religions are fabricated.

So the evidence definitely shows this is likely a man made thing..

Likely for you .. see above.

When a text says the orbit of the sun and moon, astronomy hadn't been invented and the sun and moon track across the sky, it's not hard to see what the writers intended..

Again, you interpret it how you want to i.e. a flawed scientific statement

 

[Kathryn]

Muhammad_isa, don't worry about him. Many historians don't even agree with him.

 

[joelr]

Your logic is severely flawed!
Each creed needs to be examined individually..

It isn't a hard question, every religion that makes claims that are not true. Which would include Christianity because you don't buy the stories about Jesus. Mormonism, you don't believe those revelations. The Greek pantheon, the Roman pantheon.

I already gave you some basic information about what myth is, if you want to go deeper read Campbell.

 

[joelr]

Yes .. and you interpret the evidence with your pre-defined supposition that
all religions are fabricated.

Not even a little bit true. The evidence I presented isn't hard to understand. Obviously it's been determined that the NT is a borrowing of Persian and Hellenism. I never said it "proves" anything.
I said the most reasonable explanation is they borrowed ideas when making a new updated story. Religions become old and less useful. Judaism adopted trends that became very popular to stay relavent.

Since nothing supernatural has ever been demonstrated, and we know for sure nations all make myths and make up supernatural characters, a reasonable conclusion is the OT is more of the same.
There is no other way to interpret this evidence that is reasonable or probable.

Messianic expectation is claimed by Christians to be prophecies of Jesus in the OT.
Jewish scholars point out those were not about Jesus but other characters. Historians point out that messianic expectation originally comes from Persian myth. When they occupied Israel the stories slowly merged into Jewish theology.
Islam also took the idea on.


Messianism
Messianism is the belief in the advent of a messiah who acts as the savior of a group of people. Messianism originated as a Zoroastrian religious belief and followed to Abrahamic religions,[3] but other religions also have messianism-related concepts. Religions with a messiah concept include Judaism (Mashiach), Christianity (Christ), Islam (Isa Masih), Druze faith (Jesus and Hamza ibn Ali),[4][5] Zoroastrianism (Saoshyant), Buddhism (Maitreya), Taoism (Li Hong), and Bábism (He whom God shall make manifest).


In Judaism, the messiah will be a future Jewish king from the line of David and redeemer of the Jewish people and humanity.[1][6] In Christianity, Jesus is the messiah,[note 1] the savior, the redeemer, and God.[1][3] In Islam, Jesus was a prophet and the messiah of the Jewish people who will return in the end times.[3]

• 3. Greisiger, Lutz (2015). "Apocalypticism, Millenarianism, and Messianism". In Blidstein, Moshe; Silverstein, Adam J.; Stroumsa, Guy G. (eds.). The Oxford Handbook of the Abrahamic Religions. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 272–294. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199697762.013.14. ISBN 978-0-19-969776-2. LCCN 2014960132. S2CID 170614787.

"The Oxford Handbook of the Abrahamic Religions. " is a serious scholarly work, written by believers who have to admit what history shows.

This doesn't "prove" it was taken from Persian thought but it provides reasonable evidence.

Likely for you .. see above.

For everyone. You cannot escape reality. If you have a book that is claimed to be a revelation written down verbatim in a certain time and older variants are found, palimpsests are found, scholars who study the text see familiar patterns in poetry and themes from older religions, that is evidence it was written over a longer period of time and a work in progress.

You can say no but that isn't as reasonable. Same with the Mormon bible. Mormons can claim it was really a revelation and the golden plates were real but it isn't as reasonable as it's a created work, created by people.

Show me some evidence of real revelations, go ahead? People have been making up stories of revelations since we could write words. Always made up. Possibly they assumed their thoughts were divinely inspired, so it wasn't a direct lie.
Still not a revelation.
You haven't shown evidence for any god yet either, you haven't shown evidence for theism, or a specific version.
So saying a text is from a deity isn't rational, logical or probable.

Anyone can say things that are not true. You claim the Quran is divine, a Mormon claims their Bible is divine. Ok? Show some evidence. Until then there are reasonable explanations for these things.

Again, you interpret it how you want to i.e. a flawed scientific statement

I don't really care about specific nonsense, the Quran thinks angels are real and it things the OT is true. Even most Christians know those are just literary creations.

But this is too much -

He hath created the heavens and the earth with truth. He maketh night to succeed day, and He maketh day to succeed night, and he constrained the sun and the moon to give service, each running on for an appointed term, .......Surah Zumar 39:5


What we now know is night and day are because the sun is still and we revolve around it. Show me someone who understood this to mean anything else but that the sun moves around the earth BEFORE astronomy figured it out, then the apologists say "look, it must have meant THIS instead....."

Right, because he couldn't just say there is a solar system and the sun is the center and we revolve around it?
Instead a deity decides to mention the GALAXY and the motion of the solar system before anyone would understand?
That is such nonsense.

But the issue is, no one can show what exactly was meant so it isn't evidence either way.
Talking about Moses and Noah, is completely wrong, angels, no chance, an angry god who hates his own religion and hates all the members who tried their hardest for millenia, he now just bad-mouths? If that were a real deity it would be so evil!

And thou wilt find them greediest of mankind for life and (greedier) than the idolaters. (Each) one of them would like to be allowed to live a thousand years. And to live (a thousand years) would be no means remove him from the doom. Allah is Seer of what they do.


He's talking about the Jews. Yahweh. The god of Israel. He doesn't have the decency to go to Jewish people and tell them the Quran is correct and they are going to hell. At that time and since, billions of Jews and Christians would have died, most not even hearing about that and certainly being taught that Islam are the heretics and the Jews just remained faithful. It's really awful. That is the story?

This is so clearly untrue but if it were it would be really bad.
For disbelievers is a painful doom.


But you logic is already debunked when you even write such nonsense. "you interpret it how you want to i"
No, I interpret it how YOU want to.
Because you would agree with my logic and interpretation in any other situation. Mormonism has witnesses, a Bible that you cannot replicate, an angel giving revelations. You don't buy it. You don't buy Paul saying Jesus has resurrected and is son of god. You don't buy any supernatural story except one you give special pleading too.
You agree with historical consensus on the Greek pantheon, Roman gods, Norse gods, American Indian deities, Aztec deities, and so on. That leaves confirmation bias on the one you buy.

 

[joelr]

Muhammad_isa, don't worry about him. Many historians don't even agree with him.

There isn't much critical-historical scholarship on Islam, there is some but not a lot. It's found to be Persian, Arab folklore with some Judaism thrown in. This should not be a question of "worrying" about someone but rather a discussion about evidence, why would you even think to comment about someone being worried?
You are speaking like an evangelist who fears truth, this is a forum FOR DISCUSSION, it's not the pedantic hand waving
forum. Give your evidence?

A Critical Examination of the Quran & Islam: Dr. Shady Nasser
1:21:37 Dr. Shady Nasser: "Many islamic practices were pagan practices and they were incorporated into Islam! Pilgrimage for example, it is described in the muslim sources how pagan Arabs were doing pilgrimage around the Kaaba, the things they were saying even, it's exactly the same phrases that muslims now say, when they are doing pilgrimage, it's exactly the same phrases the pagans were using but you replace the name of the idol with the name of God, that's it! "




The Old Testament has huge amounts of historical work and the vast consensus is they are not history but stories. But if you are going to make that claim why don't you provide a source from a historian?
Archaeology has also come to this conclusion. Thomas Thompson and Van Seters were the start of getting this information out there. Devers is probably the most prolific and also agrees.



"In the early and middle 20th century, leading archaeologists such as William F. Albright and G. Ernest Wright and biblical scholars such as Albrecht Alt and John Bright believed that the patriarchs and matriarchs were either real individuals or believable composites of people who lived in the "patriarchal age", the 2nd millennium BCE.[61] But, in the 1970s, new arguments concerning Israel's past and the biblical texts challenged these views; these arguments can be found in Thomas L. Thompson's The Historicity of the Patriarchal Narratives (1974),[62] and John Van Seters' Abraham in History and Tradition (1975).[63] Thompson, a literary scholar, based his argument on archaeology and ancient texts. His thesis centered on the lack of compelling evidence that the patriarchs lived in the 2nd millennium BCE, and noted how certain biblical texts reflected first millennium conditions and concerns. Van Seters examined the patriarchal stories and argued that their names, social milieu, and messages strongly suggested that they were Iron Age creations.[64] Van Seters' and Thompson's works were a paradigm shift in biblical scholarship and archaeology, which gradually led scholars to no longer consider the patriarchal narratives as historical.[65] Some conservative scholars attempted to defend the Patriarchal narratives in the following years, but this has not found acceptance among scholars.[66][67] By the beginning of the 21st century, archaeologists had stopped trying to recover any context that would make Abraham, Isaac or Jacob credible historical figures.[68]

• 61 Bright, John (1959). A History of Israel. Westminster John Knox Press. p. 93. ISBN 978-0-664-22068-6.

• 62 Thompson, Thomas L. (1974). The Historicity of the Patriarchal Narratives: The Quest for the Historical Abraham. Gruyter, Walter de, & Company. ISBN 9783110040968.
• 63 ^ Seters, John Van (1975). Abraham in History and Tradition. Echo Point Books and Media. ISBN 978-1-62654-910-4.
• 64 ^ Moore & Kelle 2011, pp. 18–19.
• 65 ^ Moorey, Peter Roger Stuart (1991). A Century of Biblical Archaeology. Westminster John Knox Press. ISBN 978-0-664-25392-9.
• 66 ^ Dever 2001, p. 98: "There are a few sporadic attempts by conservative scholars to "save" the patriarchal narratives as history, such as Kenneth Kitchen [...] By and large, however, the minimalist view of Thompson's pioneering work, The Historicity of the Patriarchal Narratives, prevails."
• 67 ^ Grabbe, Lester L. (2007). "Some Recent Issues in the Study of the History of Israel". In Williamson, H. G. M (ed.). Understanding the History of Ancient Israel. British Academy. doi:10.5871/bacad/9780197264010.001.0001. ISBN 978-0-19-173494-6. “The fact is that we are all minimalists – at least, when it comes to the patriarchal period and the settlement. When I began my PhD studies more than three decades ago in the USA, the 'substantial historicity' of the patriarchs was widely accepted as was the unified conquest of the land. These days it is quite difficult to find anyone who takes this view.”