First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
Christianity a copy cat religion?
17894 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / Small Wooded town...
Offline
Posted 11/22/08 , edited 11/22/08

Darkphoenix3450 wrote:


1. Mithra was born of a virgin on December 25th in a cave, and his birth was attended by shepherds.

2. He was considered a great traveling teacher and master.

3. He had 12 companions or disciples.

4. Mithra's followers were promised immortality.

5. He performed miracles.

6. As the "great bull of the Sun," Mithra sacrificed himself for world peace.

7. He was buried in a tomb and after three days rose again.

8. His resurrection was celebrated every year.

9. He was called "the Good Shepherd" and identified with both the Lamb and the Lion.

10. He was considered the "Way, the Truth and the Light," and the "Logos," "Redeemer," "Savior" and "Messiah."

11. His sacred day was Sunday, the "Lord's Day," hundreds of years before the appearance of Christ.

12. Mithra had his principal festival of what was later to become Easter.

13. His religion had a eucharist or "Lord's Supper," at which Mithra said, "He who shall not eat of my body nor drink of my blood so that he may be one with me and I with him, shall not be saved."

14. "His annual sacrifice is the passover of the Magi, a symbolical atonement or pledge of moral and physical regeneration."

15. Shmuel Golding is quoted as saying that 1 Cor. 10:4 is "identical words to those found in the Mithraic scriptures, except that the name Mithra is used instead of Christ."

16. The Catholic Encyclopedia is quoted as saying that Mithraic services were conduced by "fathers" and that the "chief of the fathers, a sort of pope, who always lived at Rome, was called 'Pater Patratus.'"


For example 3,000 years before Jesus was born the Egyptians worshiped the god of the Sky and Sun. He was a symbol of light and was called Horus. The Sun itself was called Horus and was also called "God's Sun" or "The Sun of God". We get the word Horizon from "Horus is risen" as the Sun rises in the morning. Horus was born to a virgin mother on December 25 and was adorned by three kings who followed a star to the East. He was baptized at the same age as Jesus and became a profound religious teacher. He had 12 disciples , one of whom betrayed him which ultimately led to his crucifixion. Horus died and rose from the grave three days later. Horus is only one of a dozen Pagan gods who have this same story and the reason is based in astrology. On the night of December 24th the tree stars of Orion's belt, which have been called "the Three Kings" since ancient times point toward the brightest star in the East which we call "Sirius". If you were to draw a line through those four stars and continue to the horizon you would find that you have marked the exact location of the sun rise on December 25th. So the three kings follow the brightest star to the east where the Sun of God is born. There's much more than this but I have gone on long enough.



I added a little more to my first post.

12301 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Valhalla
Offline
Posted 11/22/08
Mithra and horus wasn't the only ones that fit these.

There seems to be gods that springs up every age or so.
i wouldn't be surprised if another religion is established when the age of aquarius is established.





17894 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / Small Wooded town...
Offline
Posted 11/22/08

crush_dance wrote:

Mithra and horus wasn't the only ones that fit these.

There seems to be gods that springs up every age or so.
i wouldn't be surprised if another religion is established when the age of aquarius is established.









I want to freeze my self in time, so that I can wake up 3000 years later, just to see what the next big religion is that uses the same storyline.

I would get such a kick out of that! For Human minds are unable to let go of primitive superstitions completely, maby in another 7000 years or so.
17894 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / Small Wooded town...
Offline
Posted 6/24/09
'This topic needs to see the light again.. I love to see what people have to say about this old one of mine.
5229 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / Mammago Garage, Y...
Offline
Posted 6/24/09
The same thing they said last year...
10513 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / In your room stea...
Offline
Posted 6/24/09
Well christanity copies and tweaks a few things from zoroastrianism, the savior being born to a virgin, concept of heaven and hell, the concept of a soul, and so on, all originally came from zoroastrianism. So yeah it could be considered a copy cat religion I suppose.
3229 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 6/24/09
Indeed. The paralells to christianity in greek mythology is un mistakable. neptunes trident is the devils pitchfork. Pans horns now belong to Satan. God and zeus could be twins. The image of God in paintings is the spitting image of his predocessor Zeus(example:The Creation of Adam). Religion continues to evolve. If humanity is still around in 10,000 years christianity will be long forgotten and replaced by something newer.
3229 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 6/24/09

digs wrote:

Here is a link with some archeological evidence supporting the historical fact of the Exodus of the Hebrews from Egypt. http://www.bibleandscience.com/archaeology/exodus.htm

And Mary was impregnated by the Holy Spirit (not through sex, bust through a miracle) Luk 1:35 The angel answered, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called* the Son of God.

Adam and Eve did receive prophecy about the Messiah, but this was after the fall of man (after sin) Here are some links that talks more about Messianic prophecies. http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/m_prophecies.shtml http://www.godonthe.net/evidence/messiah.htm


Ah yes I saw a documentary about that on the history channel. A lot of it actually did make scientific sense. Still stumped about the death of every first born son during the plauges.
78 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 6/25/09 , edited 6/25/09
This was written by someone else, however, it's quite apt for this thread. You don't need to agree with it, but do try and consider it.


In the following argument of nine premises, I will aim to convince you that Jesus of Nazareth was a fictional character, and not a real person. I do not intend to sway the beliefs of many of you, nor even budge them - I know this to be an impossibility, for if the religious mind is well-trained at anything, it is circumventing rational argument. I only intend to sew seeds of doubt, in the hopes that perhaps some of you will nurture them and let them grow. Here goes.

1. Much, if not most, of the Bible is arguably fiction. Quit being so intellectually dishonest, Christians - this is the twenty-first century. That means the burden of proof is on YOU. If you make a claim about the universe, it is up to you to prove it is true, not the other way around. It is not up to us, the rest of the world, to prove your claims false - that is not scientific thinking, that is anti-scientific thinking. Because I am a man of my times, and believe in correcting ignorance, what I am doing here is out of courtesy to YOU, just as if I were to argue publicly that there is a Flying Spaghetti Monster orbiting Venus preparing to blow up Planet Earth, one of you would probably, out of simple human decency attempt to correct me and point me towards the truth. This is my way of doing that. Now, back to the Bible being fiction... that part's easy. Find me a snake with vocal chords, water that is dense enough for a human being to walk on, or a chemical process that converts complex carbohydrates to fish. Until then, you're out of luck, sucker. The evidence wins, and the evidence sides with me. These are invented stories... fictional dramas meant to impart some moral lesson. They are not real.

2. Following point two: from an objective, scrutinizing view, there is no reason to believe one story in the Bible over another. We cannot honestly engage shades of truth here - either the books in the Bible are historically true or they are not. Since they almost ubiquitously contain material to make the scientific person skeptical, we can chance to say the same is true of the entire book: either it happened, or it didn't. Therefore, it is no less plausible to disbelieve the Jesus myth than the myth about Enoch the nine-hundred year old man or the creation myth wherein God pats the first humans out of clay. Here's a hint: humans, like all other complex organisms, reached their present condition by millions of years of natural selection through the self-preservation of certain greedy genes. We can observe this happening today; anti-biotic resistant bacteria are a good example. Plus, we've mapped the human genome - we know our ancestry, and it's simian. Even Pope John Paul II said evolution is a historical fact. People did not come from clay.

3. By definition, intellect, or "reason" is the ability to revise one's beliefs in light of better argumentation. Taking simple, empirical data from the the world around you should make it easy to determine that the physical laws of the universe DO NOT CHANGE. It therefore stands to reason that "miracles" can only possible be one of two phenomena: A, an outside agent actually interfering with the laws of the universe; or B, hyperbolic coincidences. Considering the Bible was written in a time when allegory was the most common form of journalistic reporting and most people still believed spitting on a wound was an appropriate way to cure it, it is far more reasonable to assume the latter.

*Side note: Seriously Hoss, let me clue you in on something: things that are impossible to do now - like walking on water, resuscitation after days of biological death, and wine magically turning into blood - were just as impossible 2,000 years ago. There's a much greater power in the universe than "belief." It's called "observation."

4. To believe these stories, you must create strange rationalizations that do not hold up to true intellectual scrutiny. This brings us to the issue of honesty. Without deluding yourself, can you honestly answer the following questions? Such as, why doesn't God heal amputees? He heals everyone else miraculously, right? But neither you nor I have ever seen an amputee grow back a leg. Oh wait, God has a special plan for them. But isn't he supposed to be loving and just? What's with the discrimination, man? Or how about Jonah surviving in the belly of that whale? Wouldn't he be partially digested after three days? Maybe Baby Beluga had a slow metabolism?

5. Following four, and this one is my favorite: if Jesus is the one true messiah, the only God, whom you shall hath no other gods before him, yada yada, how come so many gods DID come before him having nearly identical biographies? There are no less than two dozen god-men of the ancient Mediterranean whose birth was heralded by a bright star in the East (Sirius, for those who don't practice astronomy), who were also adored by wise men, walked on water, fed the hungry, resurrected the dead, were crucified and rose again, etc. Many even had the same birthday as Jesus - December 25th! Not coincidentally, this was the Roman Holiday of Saturnalia centuries before the clergy decided to call it Jesus' birthday. Surprise! Christians plagiarized earlier religions. I cannot spell it out any clearer than that. Knowing that, how can one believe anything Christian doctrine teaches? How do you even begin to separate what was invented from what was borrowed? You don't. The cold, hard truth is, it was an old story then, and it's an old story now. These messianic archetypes - the man that is god, the man who conquers death - existed long, long before Jesus came around. They were old news when soap was a cutting-edge technology, before written language was even invented. They are ancient fucking history. Jesus was not the anti-type of these messianic figures, he was their distillation.

7. Following point 6. If you are skeptical of this information (and you should be, as doubt is the seed of all knowing), investigate the matter for yourself. One hugely recurring problem I find when debating with Christians is that they either know very little about other religions or are ignorant of their existence entirely. This is counter-intuitive to me, and perhaps my own fault in failing to understand the religious mind. Shouldn't it be fairly crucial to make the most educated decision in choosing a religion, if practicing the "right" one is important to you? For example, you wouldn't want to choose a religion based on plagiarism, would you? Or one that literally absorbed every earlier belief system it encountered through endless politicizing or the diplomacy of the sword? Well, better crack those books then - there's a whole heap of gods who fit the Christ mold long before Christ. I suggest you begin by researching Mithra of Rome, Attis of Frigia, Dionysis of Greece, Krishna of India, and Horus of Egypt. The last should be of particular interest to you, as his mythology is almost an exact carbon copy of Jesus', right down to the twelve apostles and three-day rebound time after being murdered by jealous clergy. Though, I should point out that Horus was worshiped nearly 1000 years BEFORE Christianity began spreading through the Hebrew-populated Roman colonies. This should come as no surprise to you, as it's written right in the bible that the Hebrews came out of Egypt.

8. On a more serious note. Western civilization may have been "built" on Judeo-Christian values (at least the "don't kill" and "don't steal" parts), but we have become a modern society and have adopted the scientific way of thinking. While the aforementioned values have indisputable merits, maintaining the dogma in its entirety is no longer necessary, especially when we consider the violence and segregation it has caused throughout the ages. Furthermore, philosophically speaking, Christian ethics are severely outdated. Since the Enlightenment, the Western World has seen far superior ethicists to Jesus of Nazareth. Kant and Mill, for example, created life-affirming ethical systems that can be applied to a wider range of people without destroying their culture or beliefs about where the universe came from and what kind of sex they should consider perverse. Truly, there is no reason to cling to the old way any longer. We have adopted science and reason in every other aspect of our lives... yet somehow we have retained Bronze Age ethics? It makes no sense. Why should we continue to believe it is better to be tribalists than to be humanists? This mentality is not compatible with a just, egalitarian society. Besides, Jesus may tell us to love one another, but he also says we should maintain the Old Testament in its entirety - no cherry-picking - which means we technically must condone rape, incest, slavery, and genocide (!). If we can do away with these parts (and we have), why not do away with the whole thing?

9. In the grand scheme of things, it would be generally permissible for one to believe in Christian ethics if it were readily understood that Jesus was not a historical person, and the story is allegory. However, if you are a Christian, you probably do believe that Jesus was a real human being. This is a threat to both the advancement of science and the absolution of religious conflict in the world, two issues that are paramount to our survival as a species as our planet nears carrying capacity and is dangerously on the brink of overheating. It creates too slippery a slope for other theocratic nonsense to take hold; for example, the mindset that human beings can literally live after death (how many soldiers would we send to die if everyone believed this is the only life?); or that preserving the existence of cell clusters which bear no conceivable human traits is somehow a better aim than alleviating actual human suffering; or that sex is harmful, but killing, bigotry, and total obedience to clandestine authority are healthy practices; or that blood sacrifice is a value modern societies should endorse. But Jesus WAS a real person, you say! There's a plethora of evidence! No, not really, outside of the gospels. And those hardly count as "evidence." They are secondary sources at best. Here's why: if a historical Jesus really lived and died between 0 and 33 CE, then we know beyond a doubt that at least forty years passed before the earliest gospel - the one written by Mark - was scribed. Because the aforementioned gospel discusses the destruction of Solomon's temple, we know it was written in or sometime after 70 CE. Given the lifespan of the period, that means the author or authors were at best infants or young children when Jesus of Nazareth was supposed to have been crucified. Moreover, the gospel writers are not themselves mentioned in the gospels, and they make no claim to actually having met Jesus. None of the apostles who walked with Jesus nor anyone who even met him wrote accounts to that effect. Granted, there are certain mentions of a "Christ" in the writings of Mediterranean historians from that period (not Justin Martyr or Pontius Pilate - sorry, but those are proven forgeries). However, if are a serious Christian, these should be of little consideration to you, as you know "the Christ" is really a title that simply means "the Anointed," and was taken up by many rabbis of that time. In not ONE of these documents is a man named Jesus, or Yeshua of Nazareth mentioned.

In conclusion, the gospels which discuss the life of Jesus of Nazareth are at best hearsay, almost certainly hyperbolized, and at worst complete fabrications. What we can determine beyond a doubt is that for at least four decades after his death, everyone in the world, including his sworn followers and students, simply forgot their messiah existed. If that doesn't cast on you a serious shade of doubt, then nothing will, and perhaps I'm not "the fool".


Quoting that doesn't mean that I'm trying to assert that Christianity is wrong, or that the religion itself is harmful, a complete fraud, or that you shouldn't believe in Christianity at all; however, don't try to impress upon me your Christian beliefs of what is true and righteous. Don't try to convince me that Christianity is the one true religion and that all other religious beliefs are inherently false; especially since Christianity itself is just a menagerie of other, far more ancient religions hashed together. I see the Bible as, at best, a work of fiction meant to impart a sense of right and wrong and, perhaps, a moral lesson. I'm completely fine if certain people need to use the Bible as THEIR moral compass, but don't try to force your morals on me (that applies to any religion, really). Morality, after all, is a very tenuous concept, everyone has their own set of morals, be it derived from religion or otherwise.

I guess what I am really against is Christian fundamentalism. I am sorry, but believing in the infallibility of the Bible, not only in matters of faith and morals, but also as a literal historical record, just seems completely illogical to me. What's worse is when Christian fundamentalists use the Bible as justification for their hate mongering; isn't that against the very core of Christianity in itself--to not pass judgment and condemn others, to not propagate prejudice, hate, violence, and bigotry? Or are fundamentalists just going to pick and choose which religious tenet you apply to others and which ones you yourself are exempt from?

I believe that the Bible is not absolute truth, that Christianity is not the one true religion. Those are my truths, and I do not live in moral turpitude because of it. I believe in equality, in treating others how you would like to be treated, in helping those that need it, and in respecting nature and its animals.

While I do believe that there is a divine being out there, what it is, I cannot begin to fathom; what its intentions are, I cannot begin to imagine. I cannot prove its existence, nor do I want to or try to. It is a belief that sets my mind at ease, to know that there is a grand scheme to things, that there is reason amongst all the chaos. It is a belief I do not attempt to impose on others; it is a belief that is mine and mine alone.
17894 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / Small Wooded town...
Offline
Posted 6/25/09

openmindedatheist wrote:


digs wrote:

Here is a link with some archeological evidence supporting the historical fact of the Exodus of the Hebrews from Egypt. http://www.bibleandscience.com/archaeology/exodus.htm

And Mary was impregnated by the Holy Spirit (not through sex, bust through a miracle) Luk 1:35 The angel answered, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called* the Son of God.

Adam and Eve did receive prophecy about the Messiah, but this was after the fall of man (after sin) Here are some links that talks more about Messianic prophecies. http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/m_prophecies.shtml http://www.godonthe.net/evidence/messiah.htm


Ah yes I saw a documentary about that on the history channel. A lot of it actually did make scientific sense. Still stumped about the death of every first born son during the plauges.


'The older CHilld would sleep on the floor wile the younger slept in the beds with there mother.

The gasses that escaped the vacano that also poison the water driving the frogs out of it, and giving it a red color. This Gas also creeped into the homes killing off anyone sleeping close to the floor.
Posted 6/25/09 , edited 6/25/09
Dose it really matter? Every religion is actually a copy from another, it's not just Christianity.
I believe you're just making an ass of yourself, again, like in every other bullshit thread you've created. You're just an aggressive atheist, and although some of your points maybe valid, I don't think you should be taken seriously.
24759 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Online
Posted 6/25/09
i never see atheists attack anything other than Christianity
137406 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / F / Georgia
Offline
Posted 6/25/09

Gaia93 wrote:

Dose it really matter? Every religion is actually a copy from another, it's not just Christianity.
I believe you're just making an ass of yourself, again, like in every other bullshit thread you've created. You're just an aggressive atheist, and although some of your points maybe valid, I don't think you should be taken seriously.


just don't post here. he keeps bumping his threads just so somebody will post in it. i think he's doing it for attention
3229 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 6/25/09

moratorium wrote:

i never see atheists attack anything other than Christianity


Because I've never been attacked by anyone other than Christians.
3229 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 6/25/09
Maybe so, but the point of this tread is more than valid. Brush up a little on your theolology and you will see the point of this thread.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.