The End of Christian America

[Jagger]

The percentage of self-identified Christians has fallen 10 points in the past two decades. How that statistic explains who we are now—and what, as a nation, we are about to become.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/192583

[actsnoblemartin]

what do you want our nation to become?


The percentage of self-identified Christians has fallen 10 points in the past two decades. How that statistic explains who we are now—and what, as a nation, we are about to become.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/192583

[Mr. P]

The percentage of self-identified Christians has fallen 10 points in the past two decades. How that statistic explains who we are now—and what, as a nation, we are about to become.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/192583

It's well established, Christians are socialist.

Just wanna save ya the time of making that comment..we all expect.

[PostmodernProphet]

I think Nero was the first to predict the end of Christianity.....or was it Caiaphas.....

[Kathianne]

Moving thread to religion.

[avatar4321]

When America leaves the Lord, we will cease to be a nation.

[actsnoblemartin]

When America leaves the Lord, we will cease to be a nation.

I believe in god, but i wanna ask the inevitable question: why?

[Mr. P]

When America leaves the Lord, we will cease to be a nation.

Are you serious or delusional?

[crin63]

When America leaves the Lord, we will cease to be a nation.

I have to disagree, America has already left the Lord. Were a post-Christian nation.

When America turns her back on Israel its all over.

[Binky]

When America leaves the Lord, we will cease to be a nation.


Guess what, you're just about there right now.

[Jagger]

what do you want our nation to become?
An nation with a government that respects God's absolute and exclusive authority over religion.

[Jagger]

It's well established, Christians are socialist.

Just wanna save ya the time of making that comment..we all expect.

lol

[Jagger]

I think Nero was the first to predict the end of Christianity.....or was it Caiaphas.....

If this was a true Christian Nation, there would be no civil authority whatsoever over the duty we owe to our Creator and the methods of discharging it.

[Jagger]

When America leaves the Lord, we will cease to be a nation.

This nation turned its back on the Lord Jesus Christ in 1789 when the people allowed Congress and the President to assume authority over the things that belong to God.

[5stringJeff]

This nation turned its back on the Lord Jesus Christ in 1789 when the people allowed Congress and the President to assume authority over the things that belong to God.

Not so. "Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God." (Romans 13:1)

[Missileman]

Not so. "Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God." (Romans 13:1)

The Third Reich was established by God?

[PostmodernProphet]

sorry Miss, the UN says you can't deride religion any more.....

[bullypulpit]

Are you serious or delusional?

"Serious" for $500, Alec.

[bullypulpit]

I have to disagree, America has already left the Lord. Were a post-Christian nation.

When America turns her back on Israel its all over.

It's hardly the decline and fall of America, although the last occupant of the Oval Office, God-fearing man that he CLAIMED to be, did much to push the country in that direction. With some 76% of Americans claiming Christianity as their religion of choice, one should think that the demise of Christianity is greatly exaggerated.

That their agenda seems to be losing traction seems to be more of a shock to those self-righteous busy-bodies on the religious right than to those Christians more interested in following the teachings of Jesus than advancing a political agenda. It's not surprising that one's faith, or lack thereof, shapes one's politics and ideology. There is no justification, however for anyone to attempt to give their specific religious views the full weight and force of civil law, regardless of their religion. Such actions are little different than imposing religion at the point of a gun, and history has shown us what that accomplishes.

So, y'all relax. If there is an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent and eternal being out there that is so petty as to feel the need to be worshiped by us puny mortals, y'all go right ahead...I'm sure it'll take care of you.

[PostmodernProphet]

There is no justification, however for anyone to attempt to give their specific religious views the full weight and force of civil law, regardless of their religion.

I agree....that's why I'm opposed to legalized abortion.....and the demands for legalizing gay marriage.....and a dozen other agendas the left is trying to force on all of us......

nothing about our "agenda" forces you to believe in anyone, but at least we don't require you to consider the abnormal to be normal......

[crin63]

The Third Reich was established by God?

That was the pope not God.

[DannyR]

I have to disagree, America has already left the Lord. Were a post-Christian nation.

When America turns her back on Israel its all over.Just curious, but how does our support or non-support of a Jewish nation (by definition non-Christian!) define us as a "Christian" nation or not?

[crin63]

Just curious, but how does our support or non-support of a Jewish nation (by definition non-Christian!) define us as a "Christian" nation or not?

It doesn't define us as a Christian nation. God just said that he would bless those who bless Israel and curse those who curse Israel. I'm just suggesting that when we finally turn our back on Israel which I think is inevitable that America will become a cursed nation no longer blessed or protected by God.

[crin63]

It's hardly the decline and fall of America, although the last occupant of the Oval Office, God-fearing man that he CLAIMED to be, did much to push the country in that direction. With some 76% of Americans claiming Christianity as their religion of choice, one should think that the demise of Christianity is greatly exaggerated.

That their agenda seems to be losing traction seems to be more of a shock to those self-righteous busy-bodies on the religious right than to those Christians more interested in following the teachings of Jesus than advancing a political agenda. It's not surprising that one's faith, or lack thereof, shapes one's politics and ideology. There is no justification, however for anyone to attempt to give their specific religious views the full weight and force of civil law, regardless of their religion. Such actions are little different than imposing religion at the point of a gun, and history has shown us what that accomplishes.

So, y'all relax. If there is an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent and eternal being out there that is so petty as to feel the need to be worshiped by us puny mortals, y'all go right ahead...I'm sure it'll take care of you.

Yeah well 76% of the looters during the Rodney King riots claimed to be born again as well. I'm of the opinion that the actual percentage is probably 10% of that. 76% percent may call themselves Christians but that doesn't make it so. Jesus said there would be few who were saved, so that just doesn't work with 76%.

[DannyR]

It doesn't define us as a Christian nation. God just said that he would bless those who bless Israel and curse those who curse Israel. I'm just suggesting that when we finally turn our back on Israel which I think is inevitable that America will become a cursed nation no longer blessed or protected by God.you basing that on Gen 12:3?

Given that the US has more Jews than all of Israel, I think that poses a bit of a problem for your theory. God seems to be talking about the Jewish people, not just the land itself. And not supporting Israel in all things it does isn't the same as "cursing" it either.

[crin63]

you basing that on Gen 12:3?

Given that the US has more Jews than all of Israel, I think that poses a bit of a problem for your theory. God seems to be talking about the Jewish people, not just the land itself. And not supporting Israel in all things it does isn't the same as "cursing" it either.

God was in reference to the nation that would be created from Abrams posterity as well as Abram.

Gen 12:1 Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee:
Gen 12:2 And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:
Gen 12:3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.

[actsnoblemartin]

crin makes some excellent points tonight, which im unable to rep him for yet.

Its not that were less christian, its that were less godly

when he says 76% percent my butt, its 10% who are truly christian he is right

we are losing our love and compassion for our fellow neighbor

losing any sense of morals , decency or character.

[DannyR]

God was in reference to the nation that would be created from Abrams posterity as well as Abram.And that specific nation no longer exists. The current Israel is a different animal founded a few thousand years later. You might as well point to Italy and call it the Roman Empire.

Where the majority of Jews live is as valid an indicator as anything else. So God would be cursing his own people if he cursed the USA.

[crin63]

And that specific nation no longer exists. The current Israel is a different animal founded a few thousand years later. You might as well point to Italy and call it the Roman Empire.

Where the majority of Jews live is as valid an indicator as anything else. So God would be cursing his own people if he cursed the USA.

God gave them the land for their nation so that is where the Jewish nation is located, regardless of how many Jews are located there.

[PostmodernProphet]

God was in reference to the nation that would be created from Abrams posterity as well as Abram.

Gen 12:1 Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee:
Gen 12:2 And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:
Gen 12:3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.

I'm curious.....I suspect that, like most Christians, you believe that there was a transition of "God's chosen people" from the Jews to all those that believe in him (Jeremiah, Isaiah, Hebrews, Romans)......

why is it that you don't also believe that transition affects the understanding of Genesis 12:3?.......

[DannyR]

I'm curious.....I suspect that, like most Christians, you believe that there was a transition of "God's chosen people" from the Jews to all those that believe in him (Jeremiah, Isaiah, Hebrews, Romans)......

why is it that you don't also believe that transition affects the understanding of Genesis 12:3?.......I considered a similar question myself, but I think the point of this discussion was that he believes the US is no longer a Christian nation, therefore obviously we don't believe in God and his people are not here, so the protection doesn't apply.

[glockmail]

I considered a similar question myself, but I think the point of this discussion was that he believes the US is no longer a Christian nation, therefore obviously we don't believe in God and his people are not here, so the protection doesn't apply. No longer applies anyway. But here in NC we're still a Christian State, so I'm protected as long as I don't move. :cheers2:

[Jagger]

Not so. "Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God." (Romans 13:1)

The men who founded our grand Republic rejected the view that civil government derives its authority from God.

[red states rule]

The men who founded our grand Republic rejected the view that civil government derives its authority from God.

"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
— John Adams, October 11, 1798

[Jagger]

the US is no longer a Christian nation
What does that mean, exactly?

[red states rule]

No longer applies anyway. But here in NC we're still a Christian State, so I'm protected as long as I don't move. :cheers2:

Our Founders made it clear

It is the duty of all men in society, publicly, and at stated seasons, to worship the SUPREME BEING, the great Creator and Preserver of the universe. And no subject shall be hurt, molested, or restrained, in his person, liberty, or estate, for worshipping GOD in the manner most agreeable to the dictates of his own conscience; or for his religious profession or sentiments; provided he doth not disturb the public peace, or obstruct others in their religious worship.

John Adams

[red states rule]

It's hardly the decline and fall of America, although the last occupant of the Oval Office, God-fearing man that he CLAIMED to be, did much to push the country in that direction. With some 76% of Americans claiming Christianity as their religion of choice, one should think that the demise of Christianity is greatly exaggerated.

That their agenda seems to be losing traction seems to be more of a shock to those self-righteous busy-bodies on the religious right than to those Christians more interested in following the teachings of Jesus than advancing a political agenda. It's not surprising that one's faith, or lack thereof, shapes one's politics and ideology. There is no justification, however for anyone to attempt to give their specific religious views the full weight and force of civil law, regardless of their religion. Such actions are little different than imposing religion at the point of a gun, and history has shown us what that accomplishes.

So, y'all relax. If there is an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent and eternal being out there that is so petty as to feel the need to be worshiped by us puny mortals, y'all go right ahead...I'm sure it'll take care of you.

Yea BP, in your world those who value life are busy bodies, while those who behead people for changing their Religion are victims of America's hate

Washington, George circular letter of farewell to the Army
June 8, 1783

I now make it my earnest prayer, that God would have you, and the State over which you preside, in his holy protection, that he would incline the hearts of the Citizens to cultivate a spirit of subordination and obedience to Government, to entertain a brotherly affection and love for one another, for their fellow Citizens of the United States at large, and particularly for their brethren who have served in the Field, and finally, that he would most graciously be pleased to dispose us all, to do Justice, to love mercy, and to demean ourselves with that Charity, humility and pacific temper of mind, which were the Characteristicks of the Divine Author of our blessed Religion, and without an humble imitation of whose example in these things, we can never hope to be a happy Nation.

[PostmodernProphet]

The men who founded our grand Republic rejected the view that civil government derives its authority from God.

???....upon what do you base that conclusion?.....I have seen no evidence of that rejection.....

[DannyR]

Our Founders made it clearSome did, others didn't. Not an either/or answer. Only fact was that most founders were Christian. Those that were not still generally believed in God. Few wanted a state run church.

Its somewhat silly to worry about what the founders would do today. They dealt with the important issues of THEIR day. They were people the same as us, and like most of us would probably be equally split on the issues of this day and age.

[Jagger]

Our Founders made it clear

It is the duty of all men in society, publicly, and at stated seasons, to worship the SUPREME BEING, the great Creator and Preserver of the universe. And no subject shall be hurt, molested, or restrained, in his person, liberty, or estate, for worshipping GOD in the manner most agreeable to the dictates of his own conscience; or for his religious profession or sentiments; provided he doth not disturb the public peace, or obstruct others in their religious worship.

John Adams

John Adams was turned out of office for assuming authority over religion by issuing religious proclamations.

[Jagger]

Washington, George circular letter of farewell to the Army
June 8, 1783


George Washington was a Godless Heathen, just like the other heathens who wrote the Constitution, which failed to acknowledge God as the source of authority for civil government.

[Jagger]

???....upon what do you base that conclusion?.....I have seen no evidence of that rejection.....

Where does the DOI say that government derives its authority? In whose name was the Constitution established?

[Jagger]

Most of the men who wrote the Constitution were liberal Christians who wanted religion totally excluded from the authority of civil government. As a group, they were probably more liberal and progressive than the general population.

[Jagger]

They were people the same as us, and like most of us would probably be equally split on the issues of this day and age.
I agree.

[PostmodernProphet]

Where does the DOI say that government derives its authority? In whose name was the Constitution established?

/looks at my question...../looks at Jagger's reply...../realizes that there is no correlation between the two unless he intended to admit he was wrong...../wonders why Jagger won't simply answer the question asked......

[avatar4321]

Most of the men who wrote the Constitution were liberal Christians who wanted religion totally excluded from the authority of civil government. As a group, they were probably more liberal and progressive than the general population.

Actually you have that backwards. They wanted government authority totally excuded from Religion.

[Psychoblues]

The end of Christian America,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,indeed.

The GOP,,,the party of fear and loathing,,,sad,,,,

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[bullypulpit]

No longer applies anyway. But here in NC we're still a Christian State, so I'm protected as long as I don't move. :cheers2:

By your "Super Jesus Forcefield"? :laugh2:

[red states rule]

By your "Super Jesus Forcefield"? :laugh2:

Is this yours? I can see Obama suporters getting one for their car

Need guidance and protection during these tough times? Then you need the Dashboard Obama. Remember, the government is here to solve all your problems, but when they’re not around—make sure Obama is your co-pilot! You won’t care if it rains or freezes, as long as you got your plastic Jesus Obama. Do your part -- buy "Dashboard Obama" today.

https://a248.e.akamai.net/7/248/13614/1/www.palmcoastd.com/ows-img/glennbeck/products/obamadollfeatured.jpg

https://members.premiereinteractive.com/glennbeck/studio.htm

[Jagger]

Actually you have that backwards. They wanted government authority totally excuded from Religion.
All I know is that James Madison said there is not a shadow of a right in the general government to intermeddle with religion.

[Jagger]

???....upon what do you base that conclusion?.....I have seen no evidence of that rejection.....

Most of the founders believed that civil government derives just powers from the consent of the governed, not from God.

[Jagger]

"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
— John Adams, October 11, 1798

Where does that say civil government derives it's authority from God rather than the people and when did the letters of John Adams become part of the U. S. Constitution?


Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people.

In 1798 most moral religious Americans believed in Separation of Church and State. That's why the people, in 1800, turned John Adams out of office for meddling in religious matters.

[PostmodernProphet]

In 1798 most moral religious Americans believed in Separation of Church and State. That's why the people, in 1800, turned John Adams out of office for meddling in religious matters.

that has nothing to do with the point you claimed to make......

you said...."The men who founded our grand Republic rejected the view that civil government derives its authority from God.".....so far you have made no attempt to back that up with some authority....let's see some evidence of rejection, so far all you have shown is opposition to government trying to dictate to religion......

[Jagger]

that has nothing to do with the point you claimed to make......

you said...."The men who founded our grand Republic rejected the view that civil government derives its authority from God.".....so far you have made no attempt to back that up with some authority....let's see some evidence of rejection, so far all you have shown is opposition to government trying to dictate to religion......


From what source does the U. S. Constitution derive it's authority?

A. "We the People"

B. "God"

[avatar4321]

All I know is that James Madison said there is not a shadow of a right in the general government to intermeddle with religion.

Doesnt surprise me at all, because its exactly what I said. They wanted to keep government from interefering with religion.

[Missileman]

They wanted to keep government from interefering with religion.

To have any shot at that goal, then out of necessity, you must also keep religion from interfering in government.

[Jagger]

To have any shot at that goal, then out of necessity, you must also keep religion from interfering in government.

If you exclude religion from the matters over which government has authority, then the government can have no influence the duty we owe to our Creator, as regards the rendering of homage to the Almighty, and the methods we employ to discharge that duty.

Also, the duty we owe to our Creator relative to rendering homage cannot influence government policy regarding our duty to render homage to the Almighty, because the government has no authority over that matter.

The government should have no authority whatsoever over prayer, fasting, or any other method of rendering homage to God. Prayer, fasting and other methods of rendering homage to God should have no influence on government policy.

In other words, keep worship of the Almighty out of government, and keep government out of worship.

[PostmodernProphet]

From what source does the U. S. Constitution derive it's authority?

A. "We the People"

B. "God"

you should not be asking me a question at this point, you should be providing support for your claims about what the founding fathers believed....

try again.....

[Jagger]

you should not be asking me a question at this point, you should be providing support for your claims about what the founding fathers believed....

try again.....

The correct answer is B. The Constitution derives it's authority from the People, not from God.

[bullypulpit]

Is this yours? I can see Obama suporters getting one for their car

Need guidance and protection during these tough times? Then you need the Dashboard Obama. Remember, the government is here to solve all your problems, but when they’re not around—make sure Obama is your co-pilot! You won’t care if it rains or freezes, as long as you got your plastic Jesus Obama. Do your part -- buy "Dashboard Obama" today.

https://a248.e.akamai.net/7/248/13614/1/www.palmcoastd.com/ows-img/glennbeck/products/obamadollfeatured.jpg

https://members.premiereinteractive.com/glennbeck/studio.htm

Ummm...No. I prefer to litter my car with discarded fast-food containers, crumbs, french-fries, old newspapers and the occasional empty bottle of "Reed's 'Extra-Ginger' Ginger Beer". I've never been one for useless kitsch.

[Kathianne]

Ummm...No. I prefer to litter my car with discarded fast-food containers, crumbs, french-fries, old newspapers and the occasional empty bottle of "Reed's 'Extra-Ginger' Ginger Beer". I've never been one for useless kitsch.

But, you do think he will be the savior of the world as we know it, correct?

[PostmodernProphet]

The correct answer is B. The Constitution derives it's authority from the People, not from God.
great....now we know where Jagger believes the Constitution derives it's authority......however, I believe the issue you were supposed to prove was that the founders of this country rejected God's authority....still waiting on that one.....

[bullypulpit]

But, you do think he will be the savior of the world as we know it, correct?

No.

[glockmail]

Is this yours? I can see Obama suporters getting one for their car

Need guidance and protection during these tough times? Then you need the Dashboard Obama. Remember, the government is here to solve all your problems, but when they’re not around—make sure Obama is your co-pilot! You won’t care if it rains or freezes, as long as you got your plastic Jesus Obama. Do your part -- buy "Dashboard Obama" today.

https://a248.e.akamai.net/7/248/13614/1/www.palmcoastd.com/ows-img/glennbeck/products/obamadollfeatured.jpg

https://members.premiereinteractive.com/glennbeck/studio.htm
"I don't care if it rains or freezes
as long as I've got my plastic Obama
sitting on the dashboard of my car.

He don't slip and he don't slide
because his ass is magnetized, and
sitting on the dashboard of my car."

Sorry, but the Obama Messiah doesn't work. Crash!

[red states rule]

Ummm...No. I prefer to litter my car with discarded fast-food containers, crumbs, french-fries, old newspapers and the occasional empty bottle of "Reed's 'Extra-Ginger' Ginger Beer". I've never been one for useless kitsch.

Gee, I was going to buy one for you BP so you will be protected from disaster while driving on the roads while listening to PBS or Air America

[red states rule]

"I don't care if it rains or freezes
as long as I've got my plastic Obama
sitting on the dashboard of my car.

He don't slip and he don't slide
because his ass is magnetized, and
sitting on the dashboard of my car."

Sorry, but the Obama Messiah doesn't work. Crash!

http://www.strangepolitics.com/images/content/149153

[PostmodernProphet]

Sorry, but the Obama Messiah doesn't work. Crash!

it depends on what your definition of "Save my ass!", is......

[Jagger]

http://www.insanereagan.com/

[bullypulpit]

The whole issue of religion, or lack thereof, would be a moot point if the practitioners of any given religion would just leave everyone else alone. But no...and especially for the Abrahamic religions...their doctrine says that everyone else is WRONG, and must therefore be converted. But, of course, in matters of religion as in matters of taste, differences can be bitter. Although, for the most part, one's taste in art won't get one killed. Religious differences on the other hand, can get people...many, many people...killed, and for no good reason.

Damn...If you feel compelled to share the "good news", limit it to a soap-box in the town square.

[glockmail]

Freedom of speech Bully. Too bad for you.

[5stringJeff]

The men who founded our grand Republic rejected the view that civil government derives its authority from God.

Irrelevant. The truth of God's Word stands, whether people choose to believe in it or not.

[bullypulpit]

Freedom of speech Bully. Too bad for you.

Damn...If you feel compelled to share the "good news", limit it to a soap-box in the town square. That's free speech at its most fundamental level. And, "free speech" also means that anyone who wants to is also free to ignore you.

[bullypulpit]

Irrelevant. The truth of God's Word stands, whether people choose to believe in it or not.

Here we go again! Who determines just WHAT "God's word" is?

[red states rule]

The whole issue of religion, or lack thereof, would be a moot point if the practitioners of any given religion would just leave everyone else alone. But no...and especially for the Abrahamic religions...their doctrine says that everyone else is WRONG, and must therefore be converted. But, of course, in matters of religion as in matters of taste, differences can be bitter. Although, for the most part, one's taste in art won't get one killed. Religious differences on the other hand, can get people...many, many people...killed, and for no good reason.

Damn...If you feel compelled to share the "good news", limit it to a soap-box in the town square.

Then why do libs go out of their way to attack Christains, and try to remove all public references of God from public view?

But leave other religions alone?

[bullypulpit]

Then why do libs go out of their way to attack Christains, and try to remove all public references of God from public view?

But leave other religions alone?

Neither I nor any of my liberal acquaintances go out of our way to "attack" Christianity. It's usually when some right wing nut makes some stupid claim in the name of Christianity that shit gates stirred up. The sad fact of the matter is that religious zealots of any stripe give the religion they claim a bad name, and that's what's happened here in America.

As for other religions, most of them aren't annoying people with their self righteous, stick-up-the-ass, moral rectitude and absolute conviction that their way is the one and only way. Those that do annoy folks get their fair share of comeuppance.

[red states rule]

Neither I nor any of my liberal acquaintances go out of our way to "attack" Christianity. It's usually when some right wing nut makes some stupid claim in the name of Christianity that shit gates stirred up. The sad fact of the matter is that religious zealots of any stripe give the religion they claim a bad name, and that's what's happened here in America.

As for other religions, most of them aren't annoying people with their self righteous, stick-up-the-ass, moral rectitude and absolute conviction that their way is the one and only way.

Loom at the liberla media for starters. Newsweek and their Easter gift to Christains. The annual War on Christmas the kook left launches each year.

As usual BP you will dent this, as you do the liberal media bias

And as usal, your liberal tolerance is shining through once again

[PostmodernProphet]

It's usually when some right wing nut makes some stupid claim in the name of Christianity that shit gates stirred up.

from what we've seen here on the boards, it only takes a claim like "I believe in God" to set you off.....

[5stringJeff]

Here we go again! Who determines just WHAT "God's word" is?

God determines it, and communicates it to people as He sees fit.

[bullypulpit]

from what we've seen here on the boards, it only takes a claim like "I believe in God" to set you off.....

Well yes, since it is most often accompanied by some asinine political view which has little to do with religion.

[bullypulpit]

God determines it, and communicates it to people as He sees fit.

How? And who decides whether or not this communication is genuine?

Happy Easter!

[red states rule]

Well yes, since it is most often accompanied by some asinine political view which has little to do with religion.

Yea, the Religious views of Jesse Jackson and Rev Al do indeed have little to do with Religion

Yet they are looked upon with respect in the Dem party - and few libs speak out out of fear of being tagged a racist

[Jagger]

How? And who decides whether or not this communication is genuine?

Conservatives believe religious truth should be decided by majority vote.

[Jagger]

God determines it, and communicates it to people as He sees fit. I agree, that's why the government has no business putting "In God We Trust" on our money.

[red states rule]

I agree, that's why the government has no business putting "In God We Trust" on our money.

Then do not spend any, or refuse to accept any on payday

[Jagger]

Then do not spend any, or refuse to accept any on payday

You're obviously a socialist who wants the government to tell us what our religious duties are.

[5stringJeff]

How? And who decides whether or not this communication is genuine?

Happy Easter!

God gave miraculous signs to many of his prophets, such as Moses, Joshua, Elijah, and Elisha. Moreover, the testimony of Jesus was that the entire Old Testament was inspired of God. Jesus' testimony of Himself was proven by the event we celebrate today - His resurrection from the dead.

[bullypulpit]

God gave miraculous signs to many of his prophets, such as Moses, Joshua, Elijah, and Elisha. Moreover, the testimony of Jesus was that the entire Old Testament was inspired of God. Jesus' testimony of Himself was proven by the event we celebrate today - His resurrection from the dead.

Signs and portents? Interpreted by whom?

And as far as Easter goes, the legend is remarkably similar to the much older myths of Krishna, Mithra, Attis, Horus, and the stories of their lives follow that of Jesus with remarkable similarity. Christianity is simply another syncretic religion which co-opted the myths of earlier cultures and faiths in order to foster its own growth.

[PostmodernProphet]

Signs and portents? Interpreted by whom?

And as far as Easter goes, the legend is remarkably similar to the much older myths of Krishna, Mithra, Attis, Horus, and the stories of their lives follow that of Jesus with remarkable similarity. Christianity is simply another syncretic religion which co-opted the myths of earlier cultures and faiths in order to foster its own growth.

I've heard that bullshit before.....apparently you haven't bothered to familiarize yourself with these stories, and instead just pasted the information from another ignorant atheist's website.....read the material before you embarrass yourself.....there is no "remarkable similarity"....there isn't even a rat's ass of comparison....and why do atheists insist on being so amazingly ignorant.....

[PostmodernProphet]

oh look.....Horus died from a scorpion bite and was brought back to life by the gods who owed his mother Isis a favor.....just like Easter......

http://www.sacred-texts.com/egy/leg/leg11.htm

Attis apparently bled to death after castrating himself and, instead of being resurrected, was turned into a pine tree....

now there's the Easter story in a "nut"shell.....

http://www.bartleby.com/196/81.html

[bullypulpit]

oh look.....Horus died from a scorpion bite and was brought back to life by the gods who owed his mother Isis a favor.....just like Easter......

http://www.sacred-texts.com/egy/leg/leg11.htm

Attis apparently bled to death after castrating himself and, instead of being resurrected, was turned into a pine tree....

now there's the Easter story in a "nut"shell.....

http://www.bartleby.com/196/81.html

Pick...pick...pick...Yet dodge the larger issue that Christianity, like the religions that came before it, IS a syncretic religion which borrowed from preceding religions as well as local beliefs to secure its power base.

[glockmail]

Signs and portents? Interpreted by whom?

And as far as Easter goes, the legend is remarkably similar to the much older myths of Krishna, Mithra, Attis, Horus, and the stories of their lives follow that of Jesus with remarkable similarity. Christianity is simply another syncretic religion which co-opted the myths of earlier cultures and faiths in order to foster its own growth. Except we have eyewitness testimony verifying that Jesus rose from the dead...

[PostmodernProphet]

Pick...pick...pick...Yet dodge the larger issue that Christianity, like the religions that came before it, IS a syncretic religion which borrowed from preceding religions as well as local beliefs to secure its power base.

sorry, bully, but that isn't "pick, pick, pick"....that is providing evidence that your initial claim of sycrenism was a lie......just as your so-called "larger issue" is a lie....

I challenge you to come up with ONE true statement which demonstrates Christianity is a "syncretic" religion....and I warn you, I am familiar with all of the bogus atheist "theology" sites and already know how to prove them liars, so you will need to be on your toes.....

[DannyR]

The annual War on Christmas the kook left launches each year.I think its funny you blame this on the "left", when its usually Focus on the Family and Bill O'Reilly who launches it up every year with their hitlist of retailers who don't specifically mention "Christmas" (as if Happy Holidays was a bad thing!)


Then why do libs go out of their way to attack Christains, and try to remove all public references of God from public view?Most of the time these "public references of God" are not there historically, but put up to protest separation of church and state. The multi-ton granite 10 Commandments in Alabama for instance. Even the "under God" portion in the Pledge of Allegiance wasn't there originally, but added to spite atheists.

Sorry, can't feel all that concerned about the "persecution" of Christians, when you guys represent by far the majority of the population in the USA. But nice attempt at victimhood.

[PostmodernProphet]

victimhood.

atheist's lifeblood.....if they weren't able to claim themselves as victims they wouldn't know what to do with themselves.....

[5stringJeff]

Pick...pick...pick...Yet dodge the larger issue that Christianity, like the religions that came before it, IS a syncretic religion which borrowed from preceding religions as well as local beliefs to secure its power base.

Your conclusion can only come from you attempting to make the facts fit your preconceived notions. In fact, there are no resurrection tales that match Jesus' resurrection. In fact, the resurrection myth of Mithra, whom you mention, came 200 years AFTER Christ, not before.

And, as glockmail mentioned, there were multiple eyewitness accounts of Jesus' resurrection. That's why so many people believed in it in the years immediately following the event.

[PostmodernProphet]

In fact, the resurrection myth of Mithra, whom you mention, came 200 years AFTER Christ, not before.



true enough.....the earlier Zoroastrian versions had no mention even of death for Mithra, let alone resurrection......

[Missileman]

And, as glockmail mentioned, there were multiple eyewitness accounts of Jesus' resurrection. That's why so many people believed in it in the years immediately following the event.

There are tens of thousands of eyewitnesses to bigfoot, the Loch Ness monster, and aliens, along with a myriad of other mythical/magical creatures. The stories of the existence of people claiming to have seen something, especially those written by someone with an ulterior motive, are highly suspect.

It takes much more than a few people writing about eyewitnesses to make a compelling case.

[crin63]

There are tens of thousands of eyewitnesses to bigfoot, the Loch Ness monster, and aliens, along with a myriad of other mythical/magical creatures. The stories of the existence of people claiming to have seen something, especially those written by someone with an ulterior motive, are highly suspect.

It takes much more than a few people writing about eyewitnesses to make a compelling case.

If the resurrection were not true the Jewish political and religious establishment would have exposed it and they didn't. That means there were so many witnesses that it could not be refuted.

All your references to bigfoot and like have no comparison to the resurrection. Those people were in small numbers over many years. The resurrection was hundreds of people at one time.

[PostmodernProphet]

It takes much more than a few people writing about eyewitnesses to make a compelling case.


agreed.....and that something "more" explains why 2000 years later there are significantly more people who believe in Christ than believe in bigfoot......looks like were back to "election" again......

[avatar4321]

There are tens of thousands of eyewitnesses to bigfoot, the Loch Ness monster, and aliens, along with a myriad of other mythical/magical creatures. The stories of the existence of people claiming to have seen something, especially those written by someone with an ulterior motive, are highly suspect.

It takes much more than a few people writing about eyewitnesses to make a compelling case.

Which is exactly why you shouldnt take someone elses word for it and you need to find out for yourself by going to the Source.

[Missileman]

Which is exactly why you shouldnt take someone elses word for it and you need to find out for yourself by going to the Source.

I found out for myself that there is no source.

[PostmodernProphet]

I found out for myself that there is no source.

the rest of us call that "belief".........

[bullypulpit]

sorry, bully, but that isn't "pick, pick, pick"....that is providing evidence that your initial claim of sycrenism was a lie......just as your so-called "larger issue" is a lie....

I challenge you to come up with ONE true statement which demonstrates Christianity is a "syncretic" religion....and I warn you, I am familiar with all of the bogus atheist "theology" sites and already know how to prove them liars, so you will need to be on your toes.....

Now, that's more like it. As to syncretism in Chrisitanity, you cannot deny the "birth-death-rebirth" mythos is present in many religions. For a more readily apparent comparison, we need look no further than the story of Noah in the Old Testament and the story of Ut-Napishtim in "The Epic of Gilgamesh".

From my own perspective as a Buddhist in the Tibetan tradition, Buddhism adopted many of the rituals and icons of the native Tibetan Bon religion as it made its way through Tibet. If you are intellectually honest, you cannot deny the same occured with Christianity as it moved into Europe, adopting the mythos of the native pagan religions as it moved through the continent. You can see it in the dates and symbolism of the various holidays...Christmas at the winter solstice and the birth of the new year...Easter at around the spring equinox with its symbols of rebirth and renewal.

Claims that Christianity, or any other religion, sprang forth fully formed from the lips of its prophets and remains unchanged to this day fly in the face of reason. It is equally unreasonable to assume that, having been born in the cauldron of polytheism that was the ancient world, early Christianity did not turn the mythos of those many religions to its own purpose, thus making its teachings more accessible to local populations.

When I find appropriate references and citations, I will be certain to add them to the discussion. Until then, I leave it to you to prove me wrong, and whet yout appetite with tihs:

<center><a href=>Jesus Christ in comparative mythology</a></center>

[PostmodernProphet]

For a more readily apparent comparison, we need look no further than the story of Noah in the Old Testament and the story of Ut-Napishtim in "The Epic of Gilgamesh".

not surprising since Noah was the Babylonian's ancestor as well.....


If you are intellectually honest, you cannot deny the same occured with Christianity as it moved into Europe, adopting the mythos of the native pagan religions as it moved through the continent.

sure I can, since there is no evidence of it....atheists love to present that lie, but always falter when it comes time for proof.....the examples you have given so far are the evidence of that......atheists make up shit about mythical deities and then pretend it's "just like Jesus", even when there are no similarities whatsoever.....it's just more atheist dishonesty, not similarity.....


You can see it in the dates and symbolism of the various holidays...Christmas at the winter solstice and the birth of the new year...Easter at around the spring equinox with its symbols of rebirth and renewal

first of all, the 25th is not the winter solstice....secondly, the rebirth and renewal theme (bunnies and eggs) are not a Christian theme of easter......death and resurrection of a self sacrificing deity are.....and there is no other religion, either alive or dead, that has that theme.....the church intentionally stole the pagan holidays to eliminate opportunities for people to retain their old gods as well as convert.....


Claims that Christianity, or any other religion, sprang forth fully formed from the lips of its prophets and remains unchanged to this day fly in the face of reason.

then shake it out and show it, reason-boy......


you cannot deny the "birth-death-rebirth" mythos is present in many religions.

provide evidence of any other religion who's deity sacrificed his life and was resurrected for the sake of his creation.....because I AM denying it.....


Until then, I leave it to you to prove me wrong, and whet yout appetite with tihs:

Jesus Christ in comparative mythology

???....a link back to this thread?.......does nothing for me......but if all you're going to do is link me to some dumbfuck atheists website and do no thinking of your own you're wasting your time.....I've had atheists smarter than you for appetizers......

[bullypulpit]

Except we have eyewitness testimony verifying that Jesus rose from the dead...

No, we have anecdotes. Any "eyewitness testimony" was first recorded in the earliest Gospels, which have been dated sometime between 64 AD (the martyrdom of Paul) and 70 AD (the fall of Jerusalem). These two events, however only serve to date two gospels and part of a third.

[glockmail]

No, we have anecdotes. Any "eyewitness testimony" was first recorded in the earliest Gospels, which have been dated sometime between 64 AD (the martyrdom of Paul) and 70 AD (the fall of Jerusalem). These two events, however only serve to date two gospels and part of a third. The Gospels are the testimony of four of the Disciples recorded by their Greek students.

[PostmodernProphet]

No, we have anecdotes. Any "eyewitness testimony" was first recorded in the earliest Gospels, which have been dated sometime between 64 AD (the martyrdom of Paul) and 70 AD (the fall of Jerusalem). These two events, however only serve to date two gospels and part of a third.

Luke states in his introduction that he decided to write because what Matthew and Mark had written was not chronologically accurate....and it is generally accepted that he wrote before 70 AD.....thus all three would have been in existence by that date.........if he had been in his 20s at the time of Christ's death on the cross he would only have been in his 50s at the time of writing....thus, there is no reason to deny that the gospels are eyewitness accounts.....

Matthew communicated the gospel in a way to explain Christ to the Jews.....Mark's intended audience were the Greeks.....Luke was the historian......John wrote later at a time when heretics were denying the divinity of Jesus.....his gospel is a series of evidences of Jesus' divinity.......

[bullypulpit]

unless you deny the authorship of the gospels without evidence to support the denial, we have the claimed eyewitness testimony of four gospels......

No, you have anecdotes recorded years after the events they claimed to witness.

Wow...defensive, aren't you.

[PostmodernProphet]

No, you have anecdotes recorded years after the events they claimed to witness.

Wow...defensive, aren't you.

??...not defensive, just corrective.....am I not allowed to point out your errors?....now of course, if you had some evidence to back up your claim it would be different.....but you don't and you won't......

keep in mind that on one hand we have a 2000 year old, unbroken chain of provenance.....and on the other hand we have a 20th Century atheist who says "I don't believe it"........

[Missileman]

If the resurrection were not true the Jewish political and religious establishment would have exposed it and they didn't. That means there were so many witnesses that it could not be refuted.

If the evidence were overwhelming, I doubt seriously that many Jews would have denied the Messiah. It would be akin to denying the existence of God himself.


All your references to bigfoot and like have no comparison to the resurrection. Those people were in small numbers over many years. The resurrection was hundreds of people at one time.

Those "hundreds" of eyewitnesses were recounted by four men all of whom had a stake in the success of their religion. All in all, the "evidence" of a resurrection is too weak to make it even remotely credible.

[PostmodernProphet]

Those "hundreds" of eyewitnesses were recounted by four men all of whom had a stake in the success of their religion.

of course....it was all a plot to get control of 110 acres of Italy a thousand years later.....

[Mugged Liberal]

[QUOTE=Missileman;362826]If the evidence were overwhelming, I doubt seriously that many Jews would have denied the Messiah. It would be akin to denying the existence of God himself.


There was really no question of exposing whether or not the resurrection was true or not true. What Jewish establishment (i.e. the Sanhedrin) there was did not really concern itself with the small sect of Jews who had followed Jesus of Nazareth. They were mostly collaborating with the Roman rulers.

Within a few years the Jewish establishment was far more concerned with the Zealots among the population who wished to throw out the Romans. By the time of the writing of Matthew and Mark the Jews had revolted in 66AD and Jerusalem was besieged and destroyed in 70AD. The remaining Jewish “Christians” in Palestine had dispersed in fear.

For the next 75 years the question of the truth or untruth of the Resurrection was the last thing on the mind of what was left of the Jewish leadership.

Mugged Liberal

[glockmail]

...
Those "hundreds" of eyewitnesses were recounted by four men all of whom had a stake in the success of their religion. All in all, the "evidence" of a resurrection is too weak to make it even remotely credible. There are other (small g) gospels written that give the same account. Are there any eyewitness accounts that counter all of these?

[sgtdmski]

Really we are to believe Newsweek regarding the fall of Christian America. Hmm 10% decline in 20 years, compared to a 52% decline in the past two years for Newsweek subscribers.

Seems to me that perhaps we should be talking about the Fall on Newsweek in America.

dmk

[bullypulpit]

??...not defensive, just corrective.....am I not allowed to point out your errors?....now of course, if you had some evidence to back up your claim it would be different.....but you don't and you won't......

keep in mind that on one hand we have a 2000 year old, unbroken chain of provenance.....and on the other hand we have a 20th Century atheist who says "I don't believe it"........

Well, I do have evidence...several volumes of it which needs to be read...scholarly articles not available online and the like. Your "provenance" however has numerous breaks starting with the Septuagint, on to the Council of Nicea and continuing to this very day.

Now, as to your screed in <a href=http://www.debatepolicy.com/showpost.php?p=362761&postcount=104>#104</a>...

Please provide documented evidence that Noah was the "ancestor" of the Babylonians. It should not come as a surprise that early Jews were exposed to "The Epic of Gilgamesh" as they were held in bondage IN BABYLON, for some 50 years.


...the church intentionally stole the pagan holidays to eliminate opportunities for people to retain their old gods as well as convert...

Sounds like syncretism to me...

<blockquote>Main Entry: <b>syn·cre·tism </b>
Pronunciation: \ˈsiŋ-krə-ˌti-zəm, ˈsin-\
Function: noun
Etymology:New Latin syncretismus, from Greek synkrētismos federation of Cretan cities, from syn- + Krēt-, Krēs Cretan
Date:1618
<b>1 :</b> the combination of different forms of belief or practice - Merriam-Websters Online Dictionary</blockquote>

Shake what out? The cob-webs between your ears?

Let's see here...Death and resurrection in other religions...Osiris, Adonis, Tammuz, Zalmoxis, phoenix, Baldr, Dionysus, Odin, Ishtar and Persephone.

Well, gotta go save lives...And I've got ALOT of reading to do.

[PostmodernProphet]

Well, I do have evidence...
none of which you are capable of sharing, apparently......




Your "provenance" however has numerous breaks starting with the Septuagint, on to the Council of Nicea and continuing to this very day.
to the contrary.....there are no breaks in the provenance......the bible as we know it today traces back to it's origins.....be that as it may, we are discussing the gospels, while the Septuagint is a Latin translation of the Old Testament (not that I expected you to actually know anything about theology since you've clearly demonstrated evidence of the opposite).....



Please provide documented evidence that Noah was the "ancestor" of the Babylonians.
you pretend to be a rational man.....perhaps you could take cognizance of the fact that if Noah was in truth the father of the survivors of the flood, anyone alive thereafter was his descendant......it certainly would be illogical to argue that the existence of the flood narrative amongst ALL the peoples of the earth would not have been passed down through the generations......




It should not come as a surprise that early Jews were exposed to "The Epic of Gilgamesh" as they were held in bondage IN BABYLON, for some 50 years.

interestingly there IS some evidence of influence....for example, the pre-captivity versions of the Epic of Gilgamesh do NOT include the use of birds to seek out dry land......influence existed, but it was the Babylonian tale that changed.....



Let's see here...Death and resurrection in other religions...Osiris, Adonis, Tammuz, Zalmoxis, phoenix, Baldr, Dionysus, Odin, Ishtar and Persephone.

Well, gotta go save lives...And I've got ALOT of reading to do.

apparently you do have a lot of reading to do....since you are still citing mythologies claiming they have similarities with Christianity when in truth they don't......another atheist tactic.....pretend you know what the fuck you are talking about when you obviously don't.....

Osiris....death and resurrection?......the only part of Osiris that was "resurrected" was his penis.....which his wife Isis used to then impregnate herself to deliver her son Horus.....incidentally, atheist pseudo-theologians also claim the Virgin Mary is a syncretism of Isis.....though I think it's a bit of a stretch to claim that a married woman who uses her dead husband's penis as a dildo has a valid claim to the title "virgin"......

but then, it "Sounds like syncretism" to you...


Adonis?......that's a new one.....funny you should pick him.....since he never was resurrected....


Adonis died at the tusks of a wild boar, sent by either Artemis in retaliation for Aphrodite instigating the death of Hippolytus, a favorite of the huntress goddess, or Aphrodite's paramour, Ares.[7] As Aphrodite sprinkled nectar on his body, each drop of Adonis' blood turned into a blood-red anemone, and the river Adonis (modern Nahr Ibrahim) flowing out of Mount Lebanon in coastal Lebanon ran red, according to Lucian (chs. 6 – 9). Therefore, Persephone ultimately laid claim to Adonis as his shade was transported forever more to the Underworld.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adonis

I'm not going to bother going over the rest....it's just more of the same....Bully, the only reason this stuff "sounds" like syncretism to you is that you aren't really listening to the sounds....

[Mugged Liberal]

[QUOTE=PostmodernProphet;362878]none of which you are capable of sharing, apparently......



"Septuagint is a Latin translation of the Old Testament"

The folowing is offered only with the objective of further enlightenment for all of us. I know it's from Wikipedia but all my other reading confirms to me that it is correct.

The Septuagint (IPA: /ˈsɛptuədʒɪnt/), or simply "LXX", is the Koine Greek version of the Hebrew Bible, translated in stages between the 3rd and 1st centuries BC in Alexandria.[1]
It is the oldest of several ancient translations of the Hebrew Bible into Greek, lingua franca of the eastern Mediterranean Basin from the time of Alexander the Great (356-323 BC). The word septuaginta[2] means "seventy" in Latin and derives from a tradition that seventy (or seventy-two) Jewish scholars translated the Pentateuch (Torah) from Hebrew into Greek for Ptolemy II Philadelphus, 285–246 BC.[3][4]

[PostmodernProphet]

[QUOTE=PostmodernProphet;362878]none of which you are capable of sharing, apparently......



"Septuagint is a Latin translation of the Old Testament"

The folowing is offered only with the objective of further enlightenment for all of us. I know it's from Wikipedia but all my other reading confirms to me that it is correct.

The Septuagint (IPA: /ˈsɛptuədʒɪnt/), or simply "LXX", is the Koine Greek version of the Hebrew Bible, translated in stages between the 3rd and 1st centuries BC in Alexandria.[1]
It is the oldest of several ancient translations of the Hebrew Bible into Greek, lingua franca of the eastern Mediterranean Basin from the time of Alexander the Great (356-323 BC). The word septuaginta[2] means "seventy" in Latin and derives from a tradition that seventy (or seventy-two) Jewish scholars translated the Pentateuch (Torah) from Hebrew into Greek for Ptolemy II Philadelphus, 285–246 BC.[3][4]

okay, sorry....got my Septuagint crossed with my Vulgate....should have said Greek instead of Latin....

[PostmodernProphet]

Zalmoxis took a shortcut to ressurection......by skipping dying....he actually was hiding out in a cave for three years......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zalmoxis


Tammuz also cut the theme short....by not being ressurected....he just died....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tammuz_(deity)

I am curious, Bully....why do all your examples turn out being full of crap?.........

[PostmodernProphet]

Baldr......12th Century AD.....at least you should give Christianity credit for prescience......having syncretized a religion that post dates it by 1200 years......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baldr

[DannyR]

keep in mind that on one hand we have a 2000 year old, unbroken chain of provenanceUnbroken? Not even close.

Please point out the location of ANY original source documents, written by the author himself. They do not exist. Only copies of copies remain, in which have been found sometimes substantial differences between sources so that its impossible to be certain of what actually occurred.

No, what we have today in the Bible is a document forged by committee, consisting of numerous books, each themselves written down decades after the events in question and impossible to corroborate historically except in the most general sense.

[PostmodernProphet]

Unbroken? Not even close.

Please point out the location of ANY original source documents, written by the author himself. They do not exist. Only copies of copies remain, in which have been found sometimes substantial differences between sources so that its impossible to be certain of what actually occurred.

No, what we have today in the Bible is a document forged by committee, consisting of numerous books, each themselves written down decades after the events in question and impossible to corroborate historically except in the most general sense.

unbroken......the scripture we have today can first of all be tracked to the Gutenberg printed edition.......that can be tracked by handwritten copies back to the original canonization.....canonization occurred because multiple copies were presented by a variety of churches who had copies which had been held as sacred texts for generations.....handed down in turn from an original which was presented as, for example, the Gospel of John.....

do you think there is no provenance when a dozen identical copies were compared by the canonizers and accepted as the document known as the "gospel of John"?......

worse provenance than that is accepted for ancient works of art in the antique market.....

there WAS an original source, penned by the original author.....a dozen churches had copies made.....another dozen was made of each of those copies....the fact that hundreds of years later the canonizers were able to verify them as identical is in itself provenance.....the fact that today we can compare copies thousands of years old and find them identical expands that provenance.....

and what do you have besides, "I don't believe it"?.......

[PostmodernProphet]

in which have been found sometimes substantial differences between sources so that its impossible to be certain of what actually occurred

more overinflated atheist hype....the actual differences are insignificant.....unless you are seriously concerned with how many horses Solomon had in his stable......

[PostmodernProphet]

still busy reading, Bully?........

let's see....who else is on your list......Dionysus?....aka Bacchus?.....never one to do things by halves, Dionysus apparently skipped BOTH death and resurrection......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dionysus

[Psychoblues]

My, my



:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[theHawk]

If the evidence were overwhelming, I doubt seriously that many Jews would have denied the Messiah. It would be akin to denying the existence of God himself.

But the Jews did, and still do believe that a Messiah is coming.

The Jew's own prophets predicted that many Jews would reject the Messiah.

[Psychoblues]

Sad,,,,,,,,,ain't it?!?!?!?!??!!??!?!?!?!?


:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[Missileman]

But the Jews did, and still do believe that a Messiah is coming.

The Jew's own prophets predicted that many Jews would reject the Messiah.

The rejection could be evidence that fulfillments of prophecies were falsely attributed to JC long after his death.

[Psychoblues]

You talkin' bout JC and the Prophetmeisters?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!



The rejection could be evidence that fulfillments of prophecies were falsely attributed to JC long after his death.

Heard 'em in Hamburg!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Psychoblues

[bullypulpit]

In my enforced absence, I've bee doing some reading. First was Karen Armstrong's "A History of God: The 4,000-Year Quest of Judaism, Christianity and Islam", which documents the history of the abrahamic religions from their earliest genesis. The syncretic influences of earlier religions on Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are clear.

Next was Ann Leupold's "Syncretism in Religion: A Reader". This collection pof scholarly articles on the matter again paint a clear picture of the syncretic influences of earlier religions on those which followed them, including Christianity.

Deny it all you wish, but all the historical evidence points to Christianity being a syncretic religion. Fact trumps faith, yet again.

[PostmodernProphet]

I

Deny it all you wish, but all the historical evidence points to Christianity being a syncretic religion. Fact trumps faith, yet again.

I'm happy to deny it....because yet again, you have no fact to present.......not one thing you have claimed to be has held up to inspection so far.....it must suck to be so ignorant of what you are arguing about.....obviously if the authors you mention rely on the same "evidence" that you have given us, they are as clueless as you......

[glockmail]

In my enforced absence, I've bee doing some reading. First was Karen Armstrong's "A History of God: The 4,000-Year Quest of Judaism, Christianity and Islam", which documents the history of the abrahamic religions from their earliest genesis. The syncretic influences of earlier religions on Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are clear.

Next was Ann Leupold's "Syncretism in Religion: A Reader". This collection pof scholarly articles on the matter again paint a clear picture of the syncretic influences of earlier religions on those which followed them, including Christianity.

Deny it all you wish, but all the historical evidence points to Christianity being a syncretic religion. Fact trumps faith, yet again.You read the wrong books.

[PostmodernProphet]

Armstrong's book is available online.....perhaps you could refer me to the page you believe supports your claim......I have read couple dozen pages so far but see nothing factual so far....save me some time, provide me with the page numbers.....

http://books.google.com/books?id=_n3cCF2I2FUC&dq=Karen+Armstrong&printsec=frontcover&source=an&hl=en&ei=cQz-SbPPA5iclQeb7biWCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4

[bullypulpit]

Armstrong's book is available online.....perhaps you could refer me to the page you believe supports your claim......I have read couple dozen pages so far but see nothing factual so far....save me some time, provide me with the page numbers.....

http://books.google.com/books?id=_n3cCF2I2FUC&dq=Karen+Armstrong&printsec=frontcover&source=an&hl=en&ei=cQz-SbPPA5iclQeb7biWCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4

You haven't read far enough. BUt I'll get back to you as I am working on both books still.

[PostmodernProphet]

You haven't read far enough. BUt I'll get back to you as I am working on both books still.

/shrugs......I suspect I have.....I am familiar enough with the claims made by atheists to know there is no merit to the argument......apparently you haven't "worked" on the book enough to get to the part where "the syncretic influences of earlier religions on Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are clear"

[Psychoblues]

:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues