The Pagan Christ (page 8)

notverylikely

Oh, and I totally forgot Luke, who even opens up saying everything he wrote was hearsay, and who's account differs yet again from both Mark and Matthew. And he wrote Acts. Supposedly.

tec

Satan was also a son of God, as were all the angels who disobeyed. Just because God has had sons doesn't make them all alike. And Jesus requires no sacrifice; he did in fact do away with sacrifice.

In Christian belief, Jesus Christ is the Son of God - and though you highlighted this part, these words are not written in the accounts from Encyclopedia Mythic. Obviously it is a fact of Christian belief. I just wonder why you highlighted it with the rest. And yes, I do in fact see the similarities. But the Caananites came from Noah's son.

Which, to me, emphasizes that these religions stole from the worship of Yahweh, hence the similarities in pagan rituals. I had always thought this, but never really read about the baals, giving me some evidence outside of the bible to back this up.

Also, all of these death/resurrection/life-giving rains, etc, had to do with agriculture and fertility. Jesus used these parallels(as the people understood) but spoke of giving life to men; not crops and such.

People don't have to agree with my thoughts... but man, I am definitely having fun now.

Tec

tec

And the NT is contradictory in it's message, i.e., faith is all that is needed to be save and later, faith without works is dead.

There is no contradiction here at all. All that is needed to be saved is faith. But faith should inspire one to works, and if one's faith does not inspire one to works of love, then one should reconsider the sincerity of one's faith.

notverylikely

All that is needed to be saved is faith.

The bible clearly says that faith without works is dead. Why don't you beleive the bible?

I just wonder why you highlighted it with the rest. And yes, I do in fact see the similarities. But the Caananites came from Noah's son.

Are you telling me that the Caananites came from Noah's son after the flood? If so, you will need to prove this as it deviates from standard accepted archeology. Yahweh came from El according to your source, so your unbiased source would seem to disagree with this.

Which, to me, emphasizes that these religions stole from the worship of Yahweh, hence the similarities in pagan rituals.

Your unbiased sources says that Yahweh came after these other religions.

Also, all of these death/resurrection/life-giving rains, etc, had to do with agriculture and fertility. Jesus used these parallels(as the people understood) but spoke of giving life to men; not crops and such.

Actually, Jesus said most people wouldn't understand these parables/parallels according to the Gospels. It would seem, however, that Jesus, as Baal's little brother, used the earlier ideas and adapted them. And fertility definitely has something to do with a virgin birth. Mary was so fertile she didn't even need a man.

tec

And as for the books of the bible, which Bible? The holy books that we have or just the books considered canon after the Synod of Hippo (which contains many of the books in the bible we used today) that had other books also considered part of the bible (and considered the author of the gospel of and 1st John to be different than the author of 2nd, 3rd John and Revelation) or the bible decided upon at the council of trent or the orthodox bible?

I don't think it matters which is used to prove that Jesus existed. I think opposing views on him aid in that conclusion, since he seems to have created quite a stir to get opposing ideas. But when presented with opposing ideas, someone would have sorted through which claims were authentic or not. Finding similarities in different accounts helps.

But I am not an expert on this topic, nor did I claim to be. I don't know enough about it to speak with any kind of authority, so I would prefer not to debate this until I have studied these matters.

Someone else can, of course.

awildflower

So what is the goal here then? To prove or not prove Jesus existed, or to get people to admire and follow Jesus lifestyle regardless? You have to think way outside the box here people. Underneath beliefs and any written word is the essence of who we are, who Jesus was or represented. If you are still caught up it beliefs and titles and organizations of any sort, then your part of this journey back to our essence is still on going. There's nothing wrong with that btw. But when I read these comments it always comes back to a belief or a title and that means people are still not getting it. HOWEVER, I recognize that that is the subject of this thread, I'm just throwing my two cents in there.

tec

Sorry... where does it say that Yahweh is the son of El? I don't see that.

All that is needed to be saved is faith. -me

The bible clearly says that faith without works is dead. Why don't you beleive the bible? - you

You're deliberately misusing my words, and you know it. This is what I said : There is no contradiction here at all. All that is needed to be saved is faith. But faith should inspire one to works, and if one's faith does not inspire one to works of love, then one should reconsider the sincerity of one's faith.

tec

I agree with you a hundred percent Awildflower. I'm just answering the subject of this thread.

And I do find origins and different views extremely interesting...(extremely)... that is for pure enjoyment of leaning new things. But bottom line, to a Christian, nothing about origins, which we cannot prove one way or another, should be more important than the teachings and example of Jesus.

notverylikely

I don't think it matters which is used to prove that Jesus existed.

So now you ARE trying to prove Jesus existed? Earlier you said you were not.

Finding similarities in different accounts helps.

Much like finding similarities in Egyptian, Babylonian, Persian, Caananite, Jewish and Christian myths and archeology?

But I am not an expert on this topic, nor did I claim to be. I don't know enough about it to speak with any kind of authority, so I would prefer not to debate this until I have studied these matters.

But you claim these books prove Jesus exists (or are you NOT claiming that?). How can you claim they prove something and then claim to not know these source? Of course, if you are not claiming that and we are using Jesus in the mythical tradition, then it doesn't matter.

BTW, can you address my question regarding your comment on Noah?

You're deliberately misusing my words, and you know it. This is what I said : There is no contradiction here at all. All that is needed to be saved is faith. But faith should inspire one to works, and if one's faith does not inspire one to works of love, then one should reconsider the sincerity of one's faith.

You said all one needed was faith and faith SHOULD inspire one to works. The bible clearly says faith without works IS DEAD. That contradicts what you wrote. How am I misusing that? I didn't write that bit about faith, you did. I just responded to it with what the bible said. It'snot my fault if you wrote something that disagrees with the bible.

notverylikely

Sorry... where does it say that Yahweh is the son of El? I don't see that.

It says Yahweh IS El.

The Pagan Christ

Share this