Why So Much Trinity Bashing?

[IndigoChild5559]

Jesus speaking: For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son...

I beg your pardon. That verse above is the words of the author of John, not Jesus.

 

[Dimi95]

So what is this saying to me? That God knew how to protect His people to a large extent before science took hold.

Yes , i get that , but you need to stop doing the 'straw man' on Science.
Science is a tool which can give you 'more benefit' as opose to 'more drawback'.

Let's go by your logic

Is God with or against us?

 

[YoursTrue]

I'm not so much into Christianity at this precise moment in time, but the version that I tend to come in and out of is most definitely trinitarian

Frankly, it's kind of hard to classify all the sects claiming to be Christian with their doctrines or beliefs as Christian when you look carefully at their beliefs.

 

[YoursTrue]

Yes , i get that , but you need to stop doing the 'straw man' on Science.
Science is a tool which can give you 'more benefit' as opose to 'more drawback'.

Let's go by your logic

Is God with or against us?

Not sure what you mean by that. He had his people unique from the agreement to the covenant. Sometimes He was with them, sometimes He let things happen from their enemies.

 

[walt]

I beg your pardon. That verse above is the words of the author of John, not Jesus.

You are correct!
I looked today, I was not aware that there was conflict among different ones, about some words that are written in red letter Bibles, Is actually not Jesus speaking, So I guess it's under debate, Thank you for the good advice, I have reworded my post, So now it agrees with your words.

 

[Dimi95]

Yes. religion is syncretic, ideas are passed on, we see this in Judaism and Christianity as well. Not sure what point you are making.

Just because man claimed to be God does not mean that God cannot become man.

The earliest indication of the Israelites is from 1200 BCE.

There is ongoing scholarly debate about the existence of Abraham as a historical figure. While there is no direct archaeological evidence that conclusively proves the existence of Abraham, some scholars argue that certain archaeological findings and inscriptions may support the plausibility of his existence. However, this remains a topic of discussion and interpretation within the field of biblical archaeology.

We will see what time will give us..

William Dever :
Dever: No Egyptian text mentions the Israelites except the famous inscription of Merneptah dated to about 1206 B.C.E. But those Israelites were in Canaan; they are not in Egypt, and nothing is said about them escaping from Egypt.

Q: Tell us more about the Merneptah inscription. Why is it so famous?

Dever: It's the earliest reference we have to the Israelites. The victory stele of Pharaoh Merneptah, the son of Ramesses II, mentions a list of peoples and city-states in Canaan, and among them are the Israelites. And it's interesting that the other entities, the other ethnic groups, are described as nascent states, but the Israelites are described as "a people." They have not yet reached a level of state organization.

So the Egyptians, a little before 1200 B.C.E., know of a group of people somewhere in the central highlands—a loosely affiliated tribal confederation, if you will—called "Israelites." These are our Israelites. So this is a priceless inscription.

What about before 1200 B.C.E. ?
When did people started to write?

Hebrews and Israelites are basically the same. I am aware of this. The first known mention is 1200 BCE.

The granite inscribed account of Marniptah's military campaign in Asia lists Israelites as one of the conquered peoples and says that they had moved to "Canaan." Genesis 12-50 provides the only other historical account of the Hebrews, wherein they trace their origins back to a single man, Abraham, from Mesopotamia.

"May be"? So I'm not wrong, we don't know. Like I said.

Good , we agree.

First, no, early Israelites were also polytheistic. Yahweh was under EL and given Israel as his inheritance.

How do you know that?
Where does the evidence come from?

Yahweh is not speaking in Genesis, it's a story about Yahweh speaking using Mesopotamian stories and upgraded for a new myth.

That's a bold claim.

So again , just because man taught that he can become God , does that mean that God cannot become man?

Do you know what is this?

FRANCESCA STAVRAKOPOULOU on the Bible, Jesus, death threats, Asherah,

47:40 Many temple sites found figurines of a common goddess Ashera.
Most scholars now agree we should probably consider Ashera to have been Yahweh’s consort.


Who Was Baal?

1:11:51 West Semitic Pantheon, El is supreme


1:12:02 Later Yahweh absorbs El and his story and takes his wife Ashera as a consort

Why do you think that anyome would rejects the existence of polytheism?
This is just evidence that polytheism existed , nothing more.

No, this is early Israel as I have said. Archaeologists have found thousands of fertility goddess figurines at sites like Taanach.

Which demonstrates that polytheism existed , that's it.

El, the general term for “deity” in Semitic languages as well as the name of the chief deity of the West Semites. In the ancient texts from Ras Shamra (ancient Ugarit) in Syria,El was described as the titular head of the pantheon, husband of Asherah, and father of all the other gods (except for Baal).

Do you know who lived in Syria through time?
Sumerians, Mitanni, Assyrians, Babylonians, Egyptians, Hittites, Canaanites, Phoenicians, Arameans, Amorites, Persians, Greeks and Romans.

This shows us that polytheism existed , this does not prove that YHWH is in any way connected with polytheism.
I can write on a stone that you are a Christian , but are you really?

The Biblical version was a later invention, 600 BCE.

Invention assumes taking side.

What's funny is it happens after the Hellenistic Greeks occupy Israel and is the same thing that happened in every nation occupied by the Greeks.
Jesus represents is what was trending at the time, Greek Hellenism - savior demigods, salvation for souls which belong in an afterlife, much has been written on this in scholarship.

We have the NT to say otherwise, with much stronger evidence.

Dr Baden is the expert in Hellenistic religion, as is J.Z. Smith. Christianity is Hellenism blended with Judaism. The Persian influence came during the 2nd Temple Period.

Where is the problem there?
How long did Hellenism survived?

Christianity is Christianity,that's it.
We don't associate ourselfs with any polytheistic belief.
But we do learn how to 'take' what might be usefull from people who are/were non-Christians.

-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.[47] Their culture was profoundly influenced by those of the peoples who ruled them.[47] Consequently, their views on existence after death were profoundly shaped by the ideas of the Persians, Greeks, and Romans.[48][49] The idea of the immortality of the soul is derived from Greek philosophy[49] and the idea of the resurrection of the dead is derived from Persian cosmology.[49] By the early first century AD, these two seemingly incompatible ideas were often conflated by Hebrew thinkers.[49] 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.[47] 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]


(Sanders, Wright)

Hellenistic philosophy is Ancient Greek philosophy corresponding to the Hellenistic period in Ancient Greece, from the death of Alexander the Great in 323 BC to the Battle of Actium in 31 BC. The dominant schools of this period were the Stoics, the Epicureans and the Skeptics.

For example, with regard to the initiating cause of the world, Plato and Aristotle held God to be the crafter of uncreated matter. Plotinus regarded matter as emanating from God.

 

[YoursTrue]

Yes , i get that , but you need to stop doing the 'straw man' on Science.
Science is a tool which can give you 'more benefit' as opose to 'more drawback'.

Let's go by your logic

Is God with or against us?

Again you do not (want to) see the point I am making. I take vaccines. I appreciate the work done by men and women investigating such things. I get X-rays sometimes. I greatly appreciate the work of brave men like Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis.

 

[YoursTrue]

Within Judaism, ritual handwashing is mandated prior to eating but in Christianity it's not.

For those observing that rule, it is true. It does make sense, however, to wash one's hands before putting them to the mouth. Dr. Semmelweis certainly changed the course of life for women giving birth, going against the popular erroneous idea of "science" at that time.

 

[YoursTrue]

@Dimi95 I have a neighbor who constantly says, "Oh, my God!" when she is describing something.

 

[YoursTrue]

That same charge could be made by the publishers of various Bible editions. No, any publisher who does go against the process of allowing free speech amongst scientists would be ignored by the scientific community as a whole.

OK, I may start another thread about "love your brother as yourself." Because I have a question but it's not about the Trinity.

 

[YoursTrue]

Yes , i get that , but you need to stop doing the 'straw man' on Science.
Science is a tool which can give you 'more benefit' as opose to 'more drawback'.

Let's go by your logic

Is God with or against us?

Again you do not (want to) see the point I am making. I take vaccines. I appreciate the work done by men and women investigating such things. I get X-rays sometimes. I greatly appreciate the work of brave men like Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis.
I'm not sure why you ask if God is with or against us.

 

[walt]

Again you do not (want to) see the point I am making. I take vaccines. I appreciate the work done by men and women investigating such things. I get X-rays sometimes. I greatly appreciate the work of brave men like Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis.
I'm not sure why you ask if God is with or against us.

Hi, would you please look at what I have commented on the following, does it make sense to you?


For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son... NIV --John 3:16, Matthew 16:13-16, John 20:17
And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.” --Matthew 3:17, Luke 9:35

There are several different definitions for being called "Son of God" in the Bible. How do we know for a certain which way applies to Jesus?

I have no doubt, because I let Matthew, Mark, Luke and John in all four Gospels define the words [ Son of God ] in reference to Jesus.

All four Bible writers make it very clear calling Jesus the "Son of God" as well as the Apostle Paul throughout The New Testament, over 40 times in total. I would take all the Apostles advice for a definition before I would take the advice of a definition for Jesus, that is not included in the Holy Scriptures. What do you think?

And the Apostle John comments about his words in the Gospel of John:
But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.
--John 20:31 KJV

How many times does the New Testament Explain Jesus is not really God's Son? Zero!

 

[YoursTrue]

Hi, would you please look at what I have commented on the following, does it make sense to you?


For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son... NIV --John 3:16, Matthew 16:13-16, John 20:17
And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.” --Matthew 3:17, Luke 9:35

There are several different definitions for being called "Son of God" in the Bible. How do we know for a certain which way applies to Jesus?

I have no doubt, because I let Matthew, Mark, Luke and John in all four Gospels define the words [ Son of God ] in reference to Jesus.

All four Bible writers make it very clear calling Jesus the "Son of God" as well as the Apostle Paul throughout The New Testament, over 40 times in total. I would take all the Apostles advice for a definition before I would take the advice of a definition for Jesus, that is not included in the Holy Scriptures. What do you think?

And the Apostle John comments about his words in the Gospel of John:
But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.
--John 20:31 KJV

How many times does the New Testament Explain Jesus is not really God's Son? Zero!

It makes very good sense, thank you for providing the scriptures attesting to the fact that Jesus is God's Son.

 

[joelr]

Just because man claimed to be God does not mean that God cannot become man.

Sure, any god in any fiction can become man. We have no evidence of god or god doing anything in real life.

There is ongoing scholarly debate about the existence of Abraham as a historical figure. While there is no direct archaeological evidence that conclusively proves the existence of Abraham, some scholars argue that certain archaeological findings and inscriptions may support the plausibility of his existence. However, this remains a topic of discussion and interpretation within the field of biblical archaeology.

We will see what time will give us..

It's not, William Dever is the most prolific archaeologist on the Bible:

THE FAITH OF ABRAHAM​

Q: According to the Bible, the first person to form a covenant with God is Abraham. He is the great patriarch. Is there archeological evidence for Abraham?

Dever: One of the first efforts of biblical archeology in the last century was to prove the historicity of the patriarchs, to locate them in a particular period in the archeological history. Today I think most archeologists would argue that there is no direct archeological proof that Abraham, for instance, ever lived. We do know a lot about pastoral nomads, we know about the Amorites' migrations from Mesopotamia to Canaan, and it's possible to see in that an Abraham-like figure somewhere around 1800 B.C.E. But there's no direct connection.

What about before 1200 B.C.E. ?
When did people started to write?

We have writings from thousands of years prior. The first writing is

A hymn to Inana (Inana C) and another to Inana by Edheduana

The granite inscribed account of Marniptah's military campaign in Asia lists Israelites as one of the conquered peoples and says that they had moved to "Canaan." Genesis 12-50 provides the only other historical account of the Hebrews, wherein they trace their origins back to a single man, Abraham, from Mesopotamia.

Yes, we are going in circles, that is a foundation myth (most likely), which is very common.

Good , we agree.


How do you know that?
Where does the evidence come from?

early variant of Deuteronomy
"When Elyon gave the nations as an inheritance, when he separated the sons of man, he set the boundaries of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God (bny 'l[hym]). For Yahweh's portion was his people; Jacob was the lot of his inheritance".


Thousands of Ashera figurines are found at early temple digs, one arrowhead says "blessed be Yahweh and his Ashera".

Dever has an entire video covering all the finds.


Did God Have a Wife?: Archaeology and Folk Religion in Ancient Israel

Dever

That's a bold claim.

These are all peer-reviewed PhD textbooks/monographs,


John Collins, Introduction to the Hebrew Bible 3rd ed.
“Biblical creation stories draw motifs from Mesopotamia, Much of the language and imagery of the Bible was culture specific and deeply embedded in the traditions of the Near East.
2nd ed. The Old Testament, Davies and Rogerson
“We know from the history of the composition of Gilamesh that ancient writers did adapt and re-use older stories……
It is safer to content ourselves with comparing the motifs and themes of Genesis with those of other ancient Near East texts.
In this way we acknowledge our belief that the biblical writers adapted existing stories, while we confess our ignorance about the form and content of the actual stories that the Biblical writers used.”
The Old Testament, A Historical and Literary Introduction to the Hebrew Scriptures, M. Coogan
“Genesis employs and alludes to mythical concepts and phrasing, but at the same time it also adapts transforms and rejected them”
God in Translation, Smith
“…the Bibles authors fashioned whatever they may have inherited of the Mesopotamian literary tradition on their own terms”
THE OT Text and Content, Matthews, Moyer
“….a great deal of material contained in the primeval epics in Genesis is borrowed and adapted from the ancient cultures of that region.”


The Formation of Genesis 1-11, Carr
“The previous discussion has made clear how this story in Genesis represents a complex juxtaposition of multiple traditions often found separately in the Mesopotamian literary world….”
The Priestly Vision of Genesis, Smith
“….storm God and cosmic enemies passed into Israelite tradition. The biblical God is not only generally similar to Baal as a storm god, but God inherited the names of Baal’s cosmic enemies, with names such as Leviathan, Sea, Death and Tanninim.”



Seams and Sources: Genesis 5-11 and the Historical-Critical Method

Professor Christine Hayes of Yale University -


Yale Divinity lectures

10:45 snake in Eden is a standard literary device seen in fables of this era

(10:25 - snake not Satan, no Satan in Hebrew Bible)


14:05 acceptance of mortality theme in Eden and Gilamesh story

25:15 Gilgamesh flood story, Sumerian flood story comparisons


26:21 - there are significant contrasts as well between the Mesopotamian flood story and it’s Israelite ADAPTATION. Israelite story is purposely rejecting certain motifs and giving the opposite or an improved version (nicer deity…)


36:20 2 flood stories in Genesis, or contradictions and doublets.


Yahweh/Elohim, rain/cosmic waters flowing,

40:05 two creation stories, very different. Genesis 1 formalized, highly structured


Genesis 2 dramatic. Genesis 1 serious writing style, Genesis 2 uses Hebrew word puns.


Genesis 1/2 use different terms for gender


Genesis 1/2 use different names, description and style for God

Both stories have distinctive styles, vocabulary, themes, placed side by side. Flood stories are interwoven.
Genesis to 2nd Kings entire historical saga is repeated again in Chronicles.

So again , just because man taught that he can become God , does that mean that God cannot become man?

View attachment 89890

Do you know what is this?

You have to demonstrate God first. Stories do not prove Yahweh any more than Greek stories prove Zeus.
Cuniform tablets?

Why do you think that anyome would rejects the existence of polytheism?
This is just evidence that polytheism existed , nothing more.

Yes, early Israelites were polytheists. Then they lived under Persian rule. The Persians had a monotheism.


Mary Boyce, Zoroastrianism, It's Beliefs and Practices

Doctrines taken from Persia into Judiasm.
fundamental doctrines became disseminated throughout the region, from Egypt to the Black Sea: namely that there is a supreme God who is the Creator; that an evil power exists which is opposed to him, and not under his control; that he has emanated many lesser divinities to help combat this power; that he has created this world for a purpose, and that in its present state it will have an end; that this end will be heralded by the coming of a cosmic Saviour, who will help to bring it about; that meantime heaven and hell exist, with an individual judgment to decide the fate of each soul at death; that at the end of time there will be a resurrection of the dead and a Last Judgment, with annihilation of the wicked; and that thereafter the kingdom of God will come upon earth, and the righteous will enter into it as into a garden (a Persian word for which is 'paradise'), and be happy there in the presence of God for ever, immortal themselves in body as well as soul. These doctrines all came to be adopted by various Jewish schools in the post-Exilic period, for the Jews were one of the peoples, it seems, most open to Zoroastrian influences - a tiny minority, holding staunchly to their own beliefs, but evidently admiring their Persian benefactors, and finding congenial elements in their faith. Worship of the one supreme God, and belief in the coming of a Messiah or Saviour, together with adherence to a way of life which combined moral and spiritual aspirations with a strict code of behaviour (including purity laws) were all matters in which Judaism and Zoroastrianism were in harmony; and it was this harmony, it seems, reinforced by the respect of a subject people for a great protective power, which allowed Zoroastrian doctrines to exert their influence. The extent of this influence is best attested, however, by Jewish writings of the Parthian period, when Christianity and the Gnostic faiths, as well as northern Buddhism, all likewise bore witness to the profound effect: which Zoroaster's teachings had had throughout the lands of the Achaernenian empire.

 

[joelr]

This shows us that polytheism existed , this does not prove that YHWH is in any way connected with polytheism.

If you read Fransescas new book you can see examples that Yahweh is exactly the same as all Near Eastern Gods, fights the same monsters, same stories, speaks the same, is described the same.

Francesca Stavrakopoulou Discusses Her Latest Book,










3:15 Yahweh is the same as older gods. Anthropormorphic, dynamic, colorful, emotional, vivid, changeable, masculine, real body parts. In "God: An Anatomy" Francesca explains the Hebrew text is very explicit in this.






Genesis 1:26 God said let US make humankind in our image






Job 1:6 One day the heavenly beings came to present themselves before the Lord and Satan also came among themLeviticus 3:5 Aarons sons sacrificed, pleasing aroma to the Lord.






15:35


Ain Dara temple - footprints of Yahweh walking in to the holy of holies. Gods lived in temples.


Not unique to Jerusalem.


18:15


Jacob wrestled with God, forced him to bless him and God renamed him Israel.


Genesis 32:24-30


Similar to Mesopotamian deities.






By John 1:18 the theology has changed and “no one has seen God”.






Genesis 18:16-17, 20-22 God appears to Abraham as a normal man with 2 other men who are also divine beings. God is also mulling over if he should tell Abraham what he is about to do.


Exodus 24:9-11 Moses, Arron etc, saw God

We have the NT to say otherwise, with much stronger evidence.

It doesn't say "otherwise", it's just another mystery religion, all Hellenistic, the last one. Every nation the Greeks invaded caused the religion to change into a mystery religion. A supreme God with a son/daughter savior demigod providing salvation to members.


This was a trend.

Where is the problem there?
How long did Hellenism survived?

Christianity is Christianity,that's it.
We don't associate ourselfs with any polytheistic belief.
But we do learn how to 'take' what might be usefull from people who are/were non-Christians.

No, no, no, Savior demigods, salvation that is personal, the soul belongs in heaven, the Logos, a communal meal, cosmopolitinism and much more is all Hellenism. They don't announce this in church, you have to educate yourself on the scholarship.


-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.[47] Their culture was profoundly influenced by those of the peoples who ruled them.[47] Consequently, their views on existence after death were profoundly shaped by the ideas of the Persians, Greeks, and Romans.[48][49] The idea of the immortality of the soul is derived from Greek philosophy[49] and the idea of the resurrection of the dead is derived from Persian cosmology.[49] By the early first century AD, these two seemingly incompatible ideas were often conflated by Hebrew thinkers.[49] 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.[47] 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]


(Sanders)




whttps://www.worldhistory.org/article/94/the-hellenistic-world-the-world-of-alexander-the-g/


Hellenistic thought is evident in the narratives which make up the books of the Bible as the Hebrew Scriptures were revised and canonized during the Second Temple Period (c.515 BCE-70 CE), the latter part of which was during the Hellenic Period of the region. The gospels and epistles of the Christian New Testament were written in Greek and draw on Greek philosophy and religion as, for example, in the first chapter of the Gospel of John in which the word becomes flesh, a Platonic concept.

 

[joelr]

Hellenistic philosophy is Ancient Greek philosophy corresponding to the Hellenistic period in Ancient Greece, from the death of Alexander the Great in 323 BC to the Battle of Actium in 31 BC. The dominant schools of this period were the Stoics, the Epicureans and the Skeptics.

For example, with regard to the initiating cause of the world, Plato and Aristotle held God to be the crafter of uncreated matter. Plotinus regarded matter as emanating from God.

The sanitized Google version avoids references to obvious borrowings by Christianity. The scholars do not. They read from original sources and speak the language. But even the


J.Z. Smith and Dr Tabor are showing the mystery cult elements that influenced Christianity. Not the sanitized Google versions that avoid demonstrating the NT is just a re-make of Greek savior cults.


Some early works on this is
Petra Pakkanen, Interpreting Early Hellenistic Religion (1996)



Here is J.Z. Smith's summary, notice it's all about personal salvation:

Hellenistic religion - Beliefs, practices, and institutions
-the seasonal drama was homologized to a soteriology (salvation concept) concerning the destiny, fortune, and salvation of the individual after death.


-his led to a change from concern for a religion of national prosperity to one for individual salvation, from focus on a particular ethnic group to concern for every human. The prophet or saviour replaced the priest and king as the chief religious figure.

-his process was carried further through the identification of the experiences of the soul that was to be saved with the vicissitudes of a divine but fallen soul, which had to be redeemed by cultic activity and divine intervention. This view is illustrated in the concept of the paradoxical figure of the saved saviour, salvator salvandus


-Other deities, who had previously been associated with national destiny (e.g., Zeus, Yahweh, and Isis), were raised to the status of transcendent, supreme



-The temples and cult institutions of the various Hellenistic religions were repositories of the knowledge and techniques necessary for salvation and were the agents of the public worship of a particular deity. In addition, they served an important sociological role. In the new, cosmopolitan ideology that followed Alexander’s conquests, the old nationalistic and ethnic boundaries had broken down and the problem of religious and social identity had become acute.

-Most of these groups had regular meetings for a communal meal that served the dual role of sacramental participation (referring to the use of material elements believed to convey spiritual benefits among the members and with their deity)

-Hellenistic philosophy (Stoicism, Cynicism, Neo-Aristotelianism, Neo-Pythagoreanism, and Neoplatonism) provided key formulations for Jewish, Christian, and Muslim philosophy, theology, and mysticism through the 18th century

- The basic forms of worship of both the Jewish and Christian communities were heavily influenced in their formative period by Hellenistic practices, and this remains fundamentally unchanged to the present time. Finally, the central religious literature of both traditions—the Jewish Talmud (an authoritative compendium of law, lore, and interpretation), the New Testament, and the later patristic literature of the early Church Fathers—are characteristic Hellenistic documents both in form and content.

-Other traditions even more radically reinterpreted the ancient figures. The cosmic or seasonal drama was interiorized to refer to the divine soul within man that must be liberated.

-Each persisted in its native land with little perceptible change save for its becoming linked to nationalistic or messianic movements (centring on a deliverer figure)

-and apocalyptic traditions (referring to a belief in the dramatic intervention of a god in human and natural events)


- Particularly noticeable was the success of a variety of prophets, magicians, and healers—e.g., John the Baptist, Jesus, Simon Magus, Apollonius of Tyana, Alexander the Paphlagonian, and the cult of the healer Asclepius—whose preaching corresponded to the activities of various Greek and Roman philosophic missionaries



Hellenistic Ideas of Salvation, Author(s): Paul Wendland
Source: The American Journal of Theology , Jul., 1913, Vol. 17, No. 3 (Jul., 1913), pp. 345-351
Published by: The University of Chicago Press Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3154653



Christian and Hellenistic ideas of redemption cannot be sharply separated.

The deity's resurrection from the dead gives to the initiates, who see their own destiny prefigured in his adventures, hope of a life after death.


The believer loses his individual consciousness in enthusiasm and receives the divinity into himself. In moments of orgiastic ecstasy he experiences the ultimate goal of his existence, abiding fellowship with the god, who, as redeemer and savior will free him through death from the finiteness, the suffering, and the exigencies of the earthly life. Orphism sets forth this religious experience in a mystic theology which exerts a strong influence upon Pindar and Empedocles, for example, and which suggested to Plato his magnificent treatise on the dest of the soul.




The relationship of Christianity to Hellenism appears closer in the Ephesian letter. Here Christ is the supreme power of the entire spirit-world, exalting believers above the bondage of the inferior spirits into his upper kingdom (1: 18-22). Christians must struggle with these spirits, among whom the sKoopoipdrope6 (astral spirits) are named. In like manner from the second century on Christ is more frequently extolled as a deliverer from the power of fate.' When Ignatius regards Christ's work as the communication of ryv^oaR and &0c9apria, and the Eucharist as food of immortality, he, like the author of the Fourth Gospel, shows the influence of Greek mysticism. Irenaeus' realistic doctrine of redemption also has, in common with Greek mysticism, the fundamental notions of deification, abolition of death, imperishability, and gnosis.


Christianity was the last mystery religion.
Greeks caused many others with this theology.

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

 

[joelr]

Hellenistic philosophy is Ancient Greek philosophy corresponding to the Hellenistic period in Ancient Greece, from the death of Alexander the Great in 323 BC to the Battle of Actium in 31 BC. The dominant schools of this period were the Stoics, the Epicureans and the Skeptics.

For example, with regard to the initiating cause of the world, Plato and Aristotle held God to be the crafter of uncreated matter. Plotinus regarded matter as emanating from God.

The sanitized Google version avoids references to obvious borrowings by Christianity. The scholars do not. They read from original sources and speak the language. But even the


J.Z. Smith and Dr Tabor are showing the mystery cult elements that influenced Christianity. Not the sanitized Google versions that avoid demonstrating the NT is just a re-make of Greek savior cults.


Some early works on this is
Petra Pakkanen, Interpreting Early Hellenistic Religion (1996)



Here is J.Z. Smith's summary, notice it's all about personal salvation:

Hellenistic religion - Beliefs, practices, and institutions
-the seasonal drama was homologized to a soteriology (salvation concept) concerning the destiny, fortune, and salvation of the individual after death.


-his led to a change from concern for a religion of national prosperity to one for individual salvation, from focus on a particular ethnic group to concern for every human. The prophet or saviour replaced the priest and king as the chief religious figure.

-his process was carried further through the identification of the experiences of the soul that was to be saved with the vicissitudes of a divine but fallen soul, which had to be redeemed by cultic activity and divine intervention. This view is illustrated in the concept of the paradoxical figure of the saved saviour, salvator salvandus


-Other deities, who had previously been associated with national destiny (e.g., Zeus, Yahweh, and Isis), were raised to the status of transcendent, supreme



-The temples and cult institutions of the various Hellenistic religions were repositories of the knowledge and techniques necessary for salvation and were the agents of the public worship of a particular deity. In addition, they served an important sociological role. In the new, cosmopolitan ideology that followed Alexander’s conquests, the old nationalistic and ethnic boundaries had broken down and the problem of religious and social identity had become acute.

-Most of these groups had regular meetings for a communal meal that served the dual role of sacramental participation (referring to the use of material elements believed to convey spiritual benefits among the members and with their deity)

-Hellenistic philosophy (Stoicism, Cynicism, Neo-Aristotelianism, Neo-Pythagoreanism, and Neoplatonism) provided key formulations for Jewish, Christian, and Muslim philosophy, theology, and mysticism through the 18th century

- The basic forms of worship of both the Jewish and Christian communities were heavily influenced in their formative period by Hellenistic practices, and this remains fundamentally unchanged to the present time. Finally, the central religious literature of both traditions—the Jewish Talmud (an authoritative compendium of law, lore, and interpretation), the New Testament, and the later patristic literature of the early Church Fathers—are characteristic Hellenistic documents both in form and content.

-Other traditions even more radically reinterpreted the ancient figures. The cosmic or seasonal drama was interiorized to refer to the divine soul within man that must be liberated.

-Each persisted in its native land with little perceptible change save for its becoming linked to nationalistic or messianic movements (centring on a deliverer figure)

-and apocalyptic traditions (referring to a belief in the dramatic intervention of a god in human and natural events)


- Particularly noticeable was the success of a variety of prophets, magicians, and healers—e.g., John the Baptist, Jesus, Simon Magus, Apollonius of Tyana, Alexander the Paphlagonian, and the cult of the healer Asclepius—whose preaching corresponded to the activities of various Greek and Roman philosophic missionaries



Hellenistic Ideas of Salvation, Author(s): Paul Wendland
Source: The American Journal of Theology , Jul., 1913, Vol. 17, No. 3 (Jul., 1913), pp. 345-351
Published by: The University of Chicago Press Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3154653



Christian and Hellenistic ideas of redemption cannot be sharply separated.

The deity's resurrection from the dead gives to the initiates, who see their own destiny prefigured in his adventures, hope of a life after death.


The believer loses his individual consciousness in enthusiasm and receives the divinity into himself. In moments of orgiastic ecstasy he experiences the ultimate goal of his existence, abiding fellowship with the god, who, as redeemer and savior will free him through death from the finiteness, the suffering, and the exigencies of the earthly life. Orphism sets forth this religious experience in a mystic theology which exerts a strong influence upon Pindar and Empedocles, for example, and which suggested to Plato his magnificent treatise on the dest of the soul.




The relationship of Christianity to Hellenism appears closer in the Ephesian letter. Here Christ is the supreme power of the entire spirit-world, exalting believers above the bondage of the inferior spirits into his upper kingdom (1: 18-22). Christians must struggle with these spirits, among whom the sKoopoipdrope6 (astral spirits) are named. In like manner from the second century on Christ is more frequently extolled as a deliverer from the power of fate.' When Ignatius regards Christ's work as the communication of ryv^oaR and &0c9apria, and the Eucharist as food of immortality, he, like the author of the Fourth Gospel, shows the influence of Greek mysticism. Irenaeus' realistic doctrine of redemption also has, in common with Greek mysticism, the fundamental notions of deification, abolition of death, imperishability, and gnosis.


Christianity was the last mystery religion.
Greeks caused many others with this theology.

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

 

[Dimi95]

Sure, any god in any fiction can become man. We have no evidence of god or god doing anything in real life.

Double standard fallacy

These are the most common Atheist answers on this fallacy:

"When we deal with any fictional character that contradicts the laws of nature/what we've observed to be true/etc. we can simply suspend disbelief. Thor from the Marvel Cinematic Universe can have a hammer that defies the laws of physics and we're all fine with that because there's no one out there saying "Thor from the MCU isn't a work of fiction; he's real."

History is not natural Science.

The evidence of the NT are so close to the events , it makes it the strongest historical case.You underestimate the NT.

If you reject them , you reject the fact that 500 people and more are being delusional at the same time according to events in Scripture.
These are events from first generation of eye-witnesses.
We have the Epistle of Clement who lived 35AD - 99 AD.

Also by definition , miracle is defiling the laws of nature.

Many scientist are observing this miracles in Modern time and they can't understand it.Nobody can

And every time we point to that Atheist show their ignorance in these kind of answers : 'That does not mean that God did it'.

That is how we know that Logic is inconsistent in these claims:

"It's the same way with any god especially the Christian one. Theists invoke the double standard fallacy for god to speak of him as though he's a fictional character (where his attributes are substituted in as justifications for his abilities and actions) yet insist He's real without. They do this without doing the necessary work of first using logic and evidence to prove that god is instantiated outside of the world of fiction.

For example, we've observed that energy doesn't just appear out of nowhere."



Here is what scientist are saying
"The universe began, scientists believe, with every speck of its energy jammed into a very tiny point. This extremely dense point exploded with unimaginable force, creating matter and propelling it outward to make the billions of galaxies of our vast universe. Astrophysicists dubbed this titanic explosion the Big Bang."

You see the irony?

It's not, William Dever is the most prolific archaeologist on the Bible:

He says that Archeologist are marely historians any yet all this responces.
1:10-1:15

THE FAITH OF ABRAHAM​

Q: According to the Bible, the first person to form a covenant with God is Abraham. He is the great patriarch. Is there archeological evidence for Abraham?

Dever: One of the first efforts of biblical archeology in the last century was to prove the historicity of the patriarchs, to locate them in a particular period in the archeological history. Today I think most archeologists would argue that there is no direct archeological proof that Abraham, for instance, ever lived. We do know a lot about pastoral nomads, we know about the Amorites' migrations from Mesopotamia to Canaan, and it's possible to see in that an Abraham-like figure somewhere around 1800 B.C.E. But there's no direct connection.

the name 'Abraham' existed in the general period when the Bible says that Abraham lived.

Archeology does follow up with the narrative.

Top Ten Discoveries Related to Abraham

NOTE: Here is the video version of this blog, from Episode 141 of the TV show, Digging for Truth, by the Associates for Biblical Research. Abraham was the first and greatest of the Hebrew patriarch…

biblearchaeologyreport.com

We have writings from thousands of years prior. The first writing is

A hymn to Inana (Inana C) and another to Inana by Edheduana

The Akkadian poet Enheduanna (l. 2285-2250 BCE) is the world's first author known by name and was the daughter of Sargon of Akkad (Sargon the Great, r. 2334-2279 BCE). Whether Enheduanna was, in fact, a blood relative of Sargon's or the title was figurative is not known.It is clear, however, that Sargon placed enormous trust in Enheduanna in elevating her to the position of high priestess of the most important temple in Sumer (in the city of Ur) and leaving to her the responsibility for melding the Sumerian gods with the Akkadian ones to create the stability his empire needed to thrive.

This is evidence that P O L Y T H E I S M existed , nothing more.

Yes, we are going in circles, that is a foundation myth (most likely), which is very common.

I agree , your first answer is proof of that.

early variant of Deuteronomy
"When Elyon gave the nations as an inheritance, when he separated the sons of man, he set the boundaries of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God (bny 'l[hym]). For Yahweh's portion was his people; Jacob was the lot of his inheritance".

You understand transitivity , i suppose?
Elyon - God Most High(title)
YHWH - name of God Most High

Exodus 3:14
God said to Moses, 'I am who I am'.This is what you are to say to the Israelites: 'I am has sent me to you.'

Jesus claims 'I am' from Exodus in Mark and John.

Thousands of Ashera figurines are found at early temple digs, one arrowhead says "blessed be Yahweh and his Ashera".

Dever has an entire video covering all the finds.

Which shows us evidence for the existence of polytheism

How funny , he says that Archeologist are marely historians and yet he has the guts to talk about History.

Did God Have a Wife?: Archaeology and Folk Religion in Ancient Israel

Dever





These are all peer-reviewed PhD textbooks/monographs,

This is evidence from people who practiced polytheism and what he is doing is taking that belief against monotheism.

Again , Archeologist tries to be Historian.

John Collins, Introduction to the Hebrew Bible 3rd ed.
“Biblical creation stories draw motifs from Mesopotamia, Much of the language and imagery of the Bible was culture specific and deeply embedded in the traditions of the Near East.
2nd ed. The Old Testament, Davies and Rogerson
“We know from the history of the composition of Gilamesh that ancient writers did adapt and re-use older stories……

You don't know that , Jews were subjects to tyrany and most of the evidence has been destroyed or lost.

Absence of evidence is not Evidence of Absence

Also The Bible does not claim the age of the Earth.

And this is argument against Young-Earth Creationist.

It is safer to content ourselves with comparing the motifs and themes of Genesis with those of other ancient Near East texts.

Which makes Absence of Evidence to be Evidence of Absence

I will answer the rest as soon as i have the time

 

[YoursTrue]

Double standard fallacy

These are the most common Atheist answers on this fallacy:

"When we deal with any fictional character that contradicts the laws of nature/what we've observed to be true/etc. we can simply suspend disbelief. Thor from the Marvel Cinematic Universe can have a hammer that defies the laws of physics and we're all fine with that because there's no one out there saying "Thor from the MCU isn't a work of fiction; he's real."

History is not natural Science.

The evidence of the NT are so close to the events , it makes it the strongest historical case.You underestimate the NT.

If you reject them , you reject the fact that 500 people and more are being delusional at the same time according to events in Scripture.
These are events from first generation of eye-witnesses.
We have the Epistle of Clement who lived 35AD - 99 AD.

Also by definition , miracle is defiling the laws of nature.

Many scientist are observing this miracles in Modern time and they can't understand it.Nobody can

And every time we point to that Atheist show their ignorance in these kind of answers : 'That does not mean that God did it'.

That is how we know that Logic is inconsistent in these claims:

"It's the same way with any god especially the Christian one. Theists invoke the double standard fallacy for god to speak of him as though he's a fictional character (where his attributes are substituted in as justifications for his abilities and actions) yet insist He's real without. They do this without doing the necessary work of first using logic and evidence to prove that god is instantiated outside of the world of fiction.

For example, we've observed that energy doesn't just appear out of nowhere."



Here is what scientist are saying
"The universe began, scientists believe, with every speck of its energy jammed into a very tiny point. This extremely dense point exploded with unimaginable force, creating matter and propelling it outward to make the billions of galaxies of our vast universe. Astrophysicists dubbed this titanic explosion the Big Bang."

You see the irony?


He says that Archeologist are marely historians any yet all this responces.
1:10-1:15

the name 'Abraham' existed in the general period when the Bible says that Abraham lived.

Archeology does follow up with the narrative.

Top Ten Discoveries Related to Abraham

NOTE: Here is the video version of this blog, from Episode 141 of the TV show, Digging for Truth, by the Associates for Biblical Research. Abraham was the first and greatest of the Hebrew patriarch…

biblearchaeologyreport.com

The Akkadian poet Enheduanna (l. 2285-2250 BCE) is the world's first author known by name and was the daughter of Sargon of Akkad (Sargon the Great, r. 2334-2279 BCE). Whether Enheduanna was, in fact, a blood relative of Sargon's or the title was figurative is not known.It is clear, however, that Sargon placed enormous trust in Enheduanna in elevating her to the position of high priestess of the most important temple in Sumer (in the city of Ur) and leaving to her the responsibility for melding the Sumerian gods with the Akkadian ones to create the stability his empire needed to thrive.

This is evidence that P O L Y T H E I S M existed , nothing more.



I agree , your first answer is proof of that.


You understand transitivity , i suppose?
Elyon - God Most High(title)
YHWH - name of God Most High

Exodus 3:14
God said to Moses, 'I am who I am'.This is what you are to say to the Israelites: 'I am has sent me to you.'

Jesus claims 'I am' from Exodus in Mark and John.



Which shows us evidence for the existence of polytheism

How funny , he says that Archeologist are marely historians and yet he has the guts to talk about History.


This is evidence from people who practiced polytheism and what he is doing is taking that belief against monotheism.

Again , Archeologist tries to be Historian.



You don't know that , Jews were subjects to tyrany and most of the evidence has been destroyed or lost.

Absence of evidence is not Evidence of Absence

Also The Bible does not claim the age of the Earth.

And this is argument against Young-Earth Creationist.



Which makes Absence of Evidence to be Evidence of Absence

I will answer the rest as soon as i have the time

As far as the hymn to Inanna goes, it is noted that it was written about 2300 bce. Not 100,000 years ago if you get my drift. Given the dating by socalled experts, 2300 bce in the course of time wasn't that long ago.

 

[YoursTrue]

Further, just because there are no written records of an event at the precise moment it is said to have happened written by the participants doesn't mean it didn't happen as summarized.