Why do people look to the Bible for answers when it is obvious much OLDER works exist? (page 3)

tec

Giordano - those myth similarities have been denounced pretty heavily. There is no historical books/claims that support all those virgin mothers, Dec 25th birthdays, rose from the dead, etc...

Just the fact that they put Jesus' birth on December 25th or winter solstice, shows a lack of research, and should be a red flag as to how trustworthy the claims are. And most of the myths of those other ones don't list a birth date.

There are a few threads about it here, or you could look up the myths about these god-men for themselves and see what they have to say.

PSacramento

Mithra was BORN of a Rock and the Mithra religion was around the same time of Christianity ( 100 AD to 400AD).

The Roman Cult of the Mithras was not practiced untill the 1st century, typically dated with temples in the late 1st century.

When two religions grow up so close together all one can do is speculate who borrowd what from whom.

Giordano

tec, I followed your advice and came across this: http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jckr1.htm

Views about the linkage between Krishna and Christ : Krishna was born, lived and died at least 14 centuries before Christ. Thus, if there has been any migration of beliefs between Hinduism and Christianity, the source is Hinduism.

Here are some amazing coincidences:

	#6 & 45: Yeshua and Krishna were called both a God and the Son of God.
	7: Both was sent from heaven to earth in the form of a man.
	8 & 46: Both were called Savior, and the second person of the Trinity.
	13, 15, 16 & 23: His adoptive human father was a carpenter.
	18: A spirit or ghost was their actual father.
	21: Krishna and Jesus were of royal descent.
	27 & 28: Both were visited at birth by wise men and shepherds, guided by a star.
	30 to 34: Angels in both cases issued a warning that the local dictator planned to kill the baby and had issued a decree for his assassination. The parents fled. Mary and Joseph stayed in Muturea; Krishna's parents stayed in Mathura.
	41 & 42: Both Yeshua and Krishna withdrew to the wilderness as adults, and fasted.
	56: Both were identified as "the seed of the woman bruising the serpent's head."
	58: Jesus was called "the lion of the tribe of Judah." Krishna was called "the lion of the tribe of Saki."
	60: Both claimed: "I am the Resurrection."
	64: Both referred to themselves having existed before their birth on earth.
	66: Both were "without sin."
	72: Both were god-men: being considered both human and divine.
	76, 77, & 78: They were both considered omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent.
	83, 84, & 85: Both performed many miracles, including the healing of disease. One of the first miracles that both performed was to make a leper whole. Each cured "all manner of diseases."
	86 & 87: Both cast out indwelling demons, and raised the dead.
	101: Both selected disciples to spread his teachings.
	109 to 112: Both were meek, and merciful. Both were criticized for associating with sinners.
	115: Both encountered a Gentile woman at a well.
	121 to 127: Both celebrated a last supper. Both forgave his enemies.
	128 to 131: Both descended into Hell, and were resurrected. Many people witnessed their ascensions into heaven.

If one were to delete from the Gospels the events in Jesus' life that seem to originate in Krishna's story, one would basically end up with a story of:

	A very human, itinerant, Jewish, rabbi-healer.
	A teacher who largely followed the teachings of Hillel -- a liberal Jewish rabbi from the 1st century BCE.
	An observant Jew who had a special relationship with God -- a kinship so close that Jesus referred to God by the familiar term "Abba."

tec

I can't read what's in that box you posted, but I'll check out the site and get back to you in a bit.

Tammy

Mad Sweeney

Why, and I still cannot wrap my mind around this, do people let the Bible be the answer for everything, when it is quite obvious that there are works pre-dating the Bible?

I have a similar/related question:

Why do people assume people knew more thousands of years ago than we do today? The evidence shows that primitive people were exactly that: primitive. Sure, they were clever and made use of their available resources and opposable thumbs the best they could, but does that qualify them as experts on the deep philosophical questions facing humanity? Really?

I don't think so. Maybe someone can post some reasons why ancient writings should be trusted any more than modern writings.

"Gozer the Traveler. He will come in one of the pre-chosen forms. During the rectification of the Vuldrini, the traveler came as a large and moving Torg! Then, during the third reconciliation of the last of the McKetrick supplicants, they chose a new form for him: that of a giant Slor! Many Shuvs and Zuuls knew what it was to be roasted in the depths of the Slor that day, I can tell you!" ~Louis Tully aka. the Keymaster

tec

http://www.kingdavid8.com/Copycat/JesusKrishna.html

Giordano - you should check this site out too. He lists his sources at the bottom of every page, and explains if the source is biased (as in trying to prove or disprove a parallel) or if it is simply telling the myth or belief with no care for similarities at all.

Tammy

White Dove

My question is, Why do people look to anything when they have a perfectly working brain to use?

sinis

Mad Sweeney:

Primitive people??? HAHAHAHA, I have been on digs with friends of mine, and can tell you that their are structures in this world that we do not know how they made them, and could not duplicate today. So who is the more primitive?

Well the Sumerian text of the flood predates the account of Moses writings. So who do I believe? The work preserved in STONE years before a word of mouth/paper text came along believed to be the original??

sinis

Also, as a side note, why do Meso Americans have "myths" that are almost EXACTLY like the Bibles stories when the two were sperated by DISTANCE AND TIME??? How could one influence the other during the Judeo Christian era when they literally did not know each other existed, and the Meso-American stories predate the JC era?

FloridaPerry

The Word is "living". It has effected millions upon millions down through the generations. Has that piece of clay with etchings scratched in it done the same?

Why do people look to the Bible for answers when it is obvious much OLDER works exist?

Share this