1. Advertising
    y u no do it?

    Advertising (learn more)

    Advertise virtually anything here, with CPM banner ads, CPM email ads and CPC contextual links. You can target relevant areas of the site and show ads based on geographical location of the user if you wish.

    Starts at just $1 per CPM or $0.10 per CPC.

Ever wonder how God could have a son? Easy....

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by Tray, Mar 22, 2011.

  1. pingpong123

    pingpong123 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,080
    Likes Received:
    117
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    175
    #21
    Sorry Rebecca I hadto beat you to the research :)

    SEEK AND YOU SHALL FIND

    Actually Thales your memory didnt serve you correctly on Nimrod/Tammuz. I had that question on my mind for a while also until I researched Doctor Gary Habermas. He actually did his dissertation on the resurrection of Christ and you couldnt really call him bias at the time because he was about to announce to his parents that he was seriously considering becoming a buddhist. His PHD dissertation brought him to confessing Jesus Christ as his lord and savior. The best evidence points to pagan resurrection myths coming 150 years after Jesus's Resurrection and were completely different in nature to the resurrection of Christ. Simply put the historicity of the pagan resurrection myths was not only popularized by many anti Christian sites but also its historicity was very poor. In fact historical studies seem to suggest that it was the other way around, that pagan religions borrowed from christianity about the resurrection. It took about 15 minutes to find some of the info on it because I had researched this in my earlier appologetics research.

    A little critical research shows the historical facts on these supposed Pagan resurrection myths.

    http://zeal4truth.com/2010/12/christmas-know-myth-reason/

    Dr Habermas explains that, “The real oddity about this charge is the very real disconnect between popular skeptical critiques and treatments by equally skeptical specialists in the relevant fields.” He continues to write that, “the fashionable charge that stories of crucified and risen saviours were rampant in the ancient world prior to Christianity has been dismissed by critical scholars … The reports of Buddha and Krishna come hundreds of years afterward. No other major religious founders in ancient times were ever crucified. Further, it cannot be demonstrated that there is even a single pagan resurrection account prior to Jesus, whether mythological or historical.”


    Image by Grufnik via FlickrProbably the most remarkable revelation in Dr Habermas’ excellent essay is how he demonstrates that there is “scholarly unanimity regarding especially 1 Corinthians 15:3-7, along with early sermon summaries in Acts, that dates the incredibly early proclamation of the resurrection message to about A.D. 30. It shows that this message was linked directly to the life and ministry of Jesus Christ, with no sign of legendary origin.”

    If atheists are going to celebrate the gift of ‘Reason’ this Christmas, perhaps they can do so by applying their minds to scholarly works related to the veracity of Christianity’s claims, rather than only exposing themselves to the rhetoric of popular skeptics.

    More of Dr Habermas’ works can be accessed at garyhabermas.com. For part 2 of this blog post, go to ‘Is Christianity based on a myth? – part 2‘.








    http://confidentchristianity.blogspot.com/2007/05/resurrection-myths-vs-resurrection-of.html


    The cult of Tammuz can be traced back to around 3000 B.C, and has a Babylonian-Sumerian origination.[1] Tammuz was allegedly resurrected by the goddess Inanna-Ishtar. Tammuz’s resurrection is “alleged” because the end of both the Sumerian and the Akkadian texts of the myth of "The Descent of Inanna (Ishtar)" had not been preserved. The story actually states that Dumuzi (Tammuz) did not return from death to an earthly life, but was placed in the underworld as a substitution for Inanna.[2] Apparently, there is only fragmentary evidence that Dumuzi had his sister take his place in the underworld for half of the year. Even so, the story of Tammuz is not like the resurrection story of Jesus. However, let’s take a brief look at Adonis.
    SEMrush
    The cult of Adonis has possibly been linked to the same parent deity of the cult of Tammuz. According to Jessie Weston in Ritual to Romance, “…the worship of the divinity we know as Adonis, may, under another name, reach back to an antiquity equal with that we can now ascribe to the cult of Tammuz.”[3] The earliest stories of Adonis report no death or resurrection and the “resurrection” of Adonis is not recorded until after A.D. 150.[4] Edwin M. Yamauchi, professor of history at Miami University, Ohio, in his article Easter: Myth, Hallucination, or History states, “P. Lambrechts has shown that there is no trace of a resurrection in the early texts or pictorial representations of Adonis; the four texts that speak of his resurrection are quite late, dating from the second to the fourth centuries A.D. ("La 'resurrection' d'Adonis," in Melanges Isidore Levy, 1955, pp. 207-40).”[5]

    The story of Adonis’ death is not similar to that of the sacrificial nature of Jesus’ death. Adonis was mortally wounded by a wild boar. As described in Frazer’s The Golden Bough, “At last the fair youth was killed in hunting by a wild boar, or by the jealous Ares, who turned himself into the likeness of a boar in order to compass the death of his rival.”[6] Adonis, according to the story, was eventually given to Persephone, goddess of death, for part of the year, and to Aphrodite, goddess of love for the other. This is not a picture of a god dying for the sins of the world and being resurrected to new life that all people may partake in.

    When comparing the stories of Tammuz, Dumuzi, and Adonis with the resurrection stories of Jesus, these stories only demonstrate strained similarities (in that they speak of the death and life of a being). It is also not likely the New Testament writers were mimicking later writings of dying and rising gods due to the second century appearance of the “resurrection” in the myths."

    As I said before and I shall say again, the incredible historicity of the new testament is what brought many liberaland skeptic theologins into accepting Jesus as their Lord aand savior. NO other polytheist religion posseses this type of Historicity and I believe this is because its the truth. Its much easier to defend the truth than it is to defend a lie.
    God bless

    Mary Jo


    Note: Please check referenced documents for further documentation. Articles quoted have many more sources than provided here.

    For Further Reading:
     
    Last edited: Mar 26, 2011
    pingpong123, Mar 26, 2011 IP
    SEMrush
  2. cheaplinker

    cheaplinker Member

    Messages:
    269
    Likes Received:
    2
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    28
    #22
    Stupid person said that god have a kid, god never has a kid, he has everything.
    He is powerful, so it is impossible if he has a kid, you've cheated by Paul who do not have a brain
    Back to ALLAH soon. ALLAH is the one he never gets a kid, he is the one
    ALLAH SWT
     
    cheaplinker, Mar 27, 2011 IP
  3. stOx

    stOx Notable Member

    Messages:
    6,426
    Likes Received:
    130
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    230
    #23
    Allah doesn't have kids, he just sends prophets who rape them.
     
    stOx, Mar 27, 2011 IP
    sarahk likes this.
  4. Rebecca

    Rebecca Prominent Member

    Messages:
    5,458
    Likes Received:
    349
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    325
    Articles:
    14
    #24

    With the first link Nimrod & Semiramis, the top results:

    Satan Vs. God by Herman Saini -- It claims Semiramis was seduced by Cush and had an illegitimate son called Nimrod. (So, it's claiming Nimrod was actually her son).

    Providential Beginnings by J. Rosalie Hooge -- It claims Semiramis was a Syrian princess who was taken from her husband (who then commited suicide) and given to Nimrod as his wife.

    With the second link Nimrod & Tammuz, the top results are books by Rev. Alexander Hislop. This is the same Hislop, that Wikipedia claims, evidence is lacking i.e. Hislop's goddess claim - "Protestant minister Alexander Hislop in The Two Babylons (1853)[11] claims that Semiramis was an actual person in ancient Mesopotamia who invented polytheism and, with it, goddess worship. Hislop believed that Semiramis was a consort of Nimrod, builder of the Bible's Tower of Babel, though Biblical mention of consorts to Nimrod is lacking."

    The two Babylons; or, The papal worship proved to be the worship of Nimrod ...By Alexander Hislop (rev.)

    His claim appears to be that Ninus, Nimrod, Zoroaster are one, then he goes on to say Tammuz and Zoroaster are the same, so I suppose he's claiming all four are the same individual?


    Confusing. :)
     
    Rebecca, Mar 27, 2011 IP
  5. Thales

    Thales Peon

    Messages:
    144
    Likes Received:
    5
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #25
    The claim that the resurrection theme only emerges circa 150AD is a very bold one to make. And rather than spending hours trying to argue with a scholar of the field, I will cheat and use this instead: Link as a counter to the weight of the factual assumptions that was used to build Dr. Habermas conclusion.
    Basically, what I am saying is, the arguments that the esteemed Doctor used to ultimately support his conclusion does appear to be able to withstand scrutiny. Would you agree to this, PingPong. And thank you for the comprehensive and referenced response


    Thank you, Becca, for the effort.
     
    Thales, Mar 27, 2011 IP
  6. pingpong123

    pingpong123 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,080
    Likes Received:
    117
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    175
    #26
    Actually Thales no they dont, as they arent agreedupon even in mainstream academia from citics who are atheists to ones that are theists. What is theoretically possible is not the same as what historians agree on. As I said before and correctly so that this person is in the extreme minority and I explained why in my other posts.
    Right now we are rehashing the same questions which were answered before, Namely almost all resurrection stories came about after jesus resurrection, not before and if you go back to my other post you will see that the evidence (if there was any ever was flimsy at best), plus they dont even come close to being the same as the ressurection of Jesus. If his theories withstood scrutiny thales then dont you think they would have been used by atheist debaters by now? If you check and see the only debaters that used this were the jesus seminar group who everyone in the histrorian community (both atheist and theist combined) know tat they are wackos and they dont stand up to scrutiny.

    Thales remember too do a study on the historicity of such claims of resurrection stories which do stand under heavy scrutiny.
    Hallquist is a layman with no expertise in any of these areas lol.
    Even the lunatic Richard carrier who holds some expertise disgrees with hallquist.

    As I said before themore you read about the historicity of the resurrection the more you know that you are standing on a solid historical foundation.
     
    pingpong123, Mar 27, 2011 IP
  7. pingpong123

    pingpong123 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,080
    Likes Received:
    117
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    175
    #27

    Stox your anger and bitterness is only supassed by your incredible stupidity. If you want an unbiased atheist to read up on I would suggest Professor Joseph Needham, who was angry with what he found outabout Christianity and scientific explosion in the west but unlike you he actually reads and does research and admitted the truth that the west exploded in scientific discovery compared to china because of Christiniaty not in spite of it.

    Your an angry little brit, But I dont think your low mentality is representative of most brits.

    "Atheism retards scientific progress"

    Quote by Albert Einstein

    "However, it would also seem that Einstein was not an atheist, since he also complained about being put into that camp:

    "In view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognize, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what really makes me angry is that they quote me for the support of such views."5

    "I'm not an atheist and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangements of the books, but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God."6"

    Einstein asked the idiotic atheists to never call him one. One of the greatest minds of the 20th century. Thank God he had the sense to tell those narrow minded morons not to call him one.
     
    pingpong123, Mar 27, 2011 IP
  8. Thales

    Thales Peon

    Messages:
    144
    Likes Received:
    5
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #28
    I concede.
    You're battering me here with your argument.
    But one day, when you least expect it, somewhere, someplace and sometime, I will reappear again and renew this debate again.
     
    Thales, Mar 27, 2011 IP
  9. stOx

    stOx Notable Member

    Messages:
    6,426
    Likes Received:
    130
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    230
    #29
    Pong don't defend paedophile rapists, it's doesn't show you in a particularly good light and reveals some quite distastful personality traits in you, there's a good lad.
     
    stOx, Mar 29, 2011 IP
  10. rain21

    rain21 Active Member

    Messages:
    1,365
    Likes Received:
    2
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    73
    #30
    I don't believe that and don't believe in god.
     
    rain21, Apr 2, 2011 IP