I'm certainly a little confused about Christianity, specifically its origins. I just want to get a Christian's perspective on this. Been meaning to ask this for a while now, actually.
Anyways, I took a course in social/cultural anthropology and we happened upon the idea of religion and various aspects of religion (such as symbolism, moral code, etc.). One of the most interesting aspects of that topic was the origins of religions themselves. My professor cited Christianity as a syncretic religion, a blending of symbolism and ideas from different religions such as Judaism. For example, the birth of Christ is celebrated on December 25th, which is taken directly from another religion (Bob Maher touched on this in his movie "Religulous", amongst a multitude of other things that Christianity took from other religions), whereas his real birth date was approximated to be in September. How does a Christian reconcile this issue?
if you would have finished actually reading the post i said. i believe that the bible is correct. I believe that Christ died for my sins, I believe he was the son of God that was kill and risen 3 days later. I believe that he died to take away the sins of the world and through him i am saved and forgiven.
I believe when i die that i will be in heaven.
I just didn't go into that much detail. i said that i believe what the bible said is true and that it is truth.
Yeah, I got all that, but you also acknowledged the possibility you could be wrong about all that, which I believe was ALL BS was trying to say.
so you can continue your circular arguements. it just shows again that you were not interested in a discussion.
My what now?
My arguments have been anything but circular. When I have even been making arguments. I more asked questions then anything else on this thread. (which I believe was the point of it)
I don't think saying "mystery, could your tell me what begging the question is in your own words." is "making a circular argument," since its not even an argument, let alone a circular one.
At the end of my life there could be nothing and just an empty void. I don't believe it though. I do not think that this life is all that there is and after it is over nothingness.
Really really fascinating conversations. I not only watched the whole thing, but I am now listening to it again as a backdrop to my work, I am at work.
I dislike the God of the Gaps argument.
See, when you come to the wits end of your knowledge, when you feel like you are at a loss, and just don't understand whats next, when you feel like you couldn't possibly discover the next piece in the puzzle.....THATS the moment for you to find the will power and conviction to keep pushing.
If you say, "gee, I cannot solve or figure out this problem, I give up, must be Gods work" you have abandoned the pursuit of knowledge.
Ignorance is bliss.....I disagree, but then, it is what people keep telling me.
How did he not plan our actions? He is omniscient - all-knowing. At the moment of creation he must have known the consequences of that creation entirely, and desired them, have seen an infinite number of possible universes and chosen the one we inhabit now. How is that not choosing what we do?
How many times does this have to be said? I mean really this is getting old. this is the 1000th time that this has been posted and for the 1000th time it needs to be corrected.
Just because you know what is going to happen in the future does not mean that person is not making their own choices to get there. Pre-determinination says that your life is already planned out and you are just following that plan.
You life is not pre-planned. Just because i know what happens in the future for an event doesn't mean that person isn't going to make their own choices to get there.
I can say to you that having his creation introducing imperfection was not part of his plan. To say so means that God is not perfect which would be a logical flaw all on it's own.
just because he knows the future outcome of a decision doesn't mean that he is making those decisions for you.
whereas his real birth date was approximated to be in September. How does a Christian reconcile this issue?
Simple these holiday's were taken over so as to expand the influence of the roman church. so they started incorporating the celebrations with pagan holidays to spread influence.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around. Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
Every Christian that I know understands that December 25th is NOT Jesus's birthday; rather, an incorporation of religion into the Catholic Church to help expand Christianity. Further, the C-Tree, stockings, presents, Santa Claus, etc are all a merger of everything from German immigrants to Coca-cola.
Consequently, for the majority of my adult life, I have not put up a Christmas Tree. For the purpose of Society, I give and receive gifts and celebrate the birth of my savior; however, neither tanamount to my faith.
You can add St Valentine's day, Mother's Day, Thanksgiving, Halloween, All-Saints day, Fat Tuesday, Good Friday, and yes Easter to the list of religious or connected to religion holidays that do not impact my faith nor raise an objection from me on a social level.
to be completely clear, I am not against Christmas Trees and Easter Egg hunts; however, I am 100% against them in Church as a religious expression. Two things come to mind for ritual: water babtism and communion. All others are fluff.
That is a very satisfying answer for the issue of Christmas and basically all of the other rituals of Christianity. I was, however, wondering more about Christianity's syncretic nature (i.e. many parts of the Bible itself is syncretic) and a Christian's reconciliation of this matter, citing Christmas as an example.
A lot of the bible comes from judaism. were it breaks is with the issue of Christ. The jews never fully recognized Christ as the messiah. still many jews today see him more of a prophet than the messiah.
the bible borrows very heavily from judaism though. It breaks away more in the new testament with the fact that christ was who he said he was verses a prophet.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around. Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
A lot of the bible comes from judaism. were it breaks is with the issue of Christ. The jews never fully recognized Christ as the messiah. still many jews today see him more of a prophet than the messiah.
the bible borrows very heavily from judaism though. It breaks away more in the new testament with the fact that christ was who he said he was verses a prophet.
So from my understanding of what you have said, it means that you reconcile the issue that Christianity borrowed heavily from other religions (not just Judaism) that it is basically the same ideas and teachings. Therefore under these circumstances, it doesn't really matter where it came from? That makes good sense as well. :3
Are you wishing understanding of how the many groups of Protestants reconcile their faith to one-another or with Catholics? Since I am a protestant I can answer some.
But in regards to the Bible, certainly the old testiment is a full on Jewish text that includes lesser prophets, the pentatuch, Daniel & Isiah as major prophets. Given it is more than the Torah, I can see you having questions regarding the Christian acceptance of it as canon.
basically, I consider myself grafted into the vine: becoming through Jesus one of God's chosen people. Today we use the term Christian, although the core of it is that we are gentiles who become Jews. Since the Jews who didn't accept Jesus as the Messiah continued to reproduce, calling ourselves Jewish would be confusing to most people, so we don't. Thanks to the people of Antioch, the world uses Christian instead.
For my belief, I am aligned along this line:
Did the first Christian do it? (circa say the first 100 years when only the Pauline letters and various Gospels were circulated)
If they did it, then I think it appropriate to do it as well. Thus, babtism by water in the name of Jesus, babtism of the Holy Ghost (sent by Jesus), prayer in the name of Jesus, casting out of devils in the name of Jesus, healing by the laying on of hands and prayer in the name of Jesus.
I do not agree that Catholic church (nor my own for that matter) is the "official" church representing God's will on earth.
I do not require that those who are Christians to believe that the Bible is the infaliable and inspired word of God since it didn't exist at the time of Jesus; however, I have come to that belief.
I believe in the Death, Burial and Resurrection (which is symbolized by water babtism).
I never said athiest were bad people. I know some athiests that act more christian like than some christains. I am good friends with plenty of people that would call themselves athiest, However they respect my views and i them much like i respect yours.
Why? simple unlike others you at least follow with the conversation. you don't stoop down to bashing what someone else believes.
in the end i could be wrong. it isn't about me not taking a chance. For me i believe what the bible says and that what is written in there is true and truth.
where science fails that is where God picks up. i can reconcile what we know about science and what we don't know.
Oh nvm i thought you were implying something when you said christian's should know better. I always thought it should be people should know better
Oh nvm i thought you were implying something when you said christian's should know better. I always thought it should be people should know better
No what i meant was i have seen christians quote 1 verse of scripture and then take the whole thing out of context as to make an arguement. You can't read the bible that way. verses go hand in hand and to get the meaning of one verse is you have to read the others.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around. Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
Just because you know what is going to happen in the future does not mean that person is not making their own choices to get there. Pre-determinination says that your life is already planned out and you are just following that plan.
You life is not pre-planned. Just because i know what happens in the future for an event doesn't mean that person isn't going to make their own choices to get there.
But God is all-knowing. All-knowing. He knew all possible Creations and created this one. He chose this single world out of an infinity of possibilities and made it real.
It's not that he knew in advance what we'd do. It's that he looked at all of the possibilities and chose the one we exist in, where we make the choices we have/do/will.
I can say to you that having his creation introducing imperfection was not part of his plan. To say so means that God is not perfect which would be a logical flaw all on it's own.
So God, omniscient and omnipotent, accidentally made something imperfect. Please. That sounds like saying he's not perfect (which apparently is a logical flaw).
And to say "imperfection in creation was part of God's plan" means that God is not perfect, but to say "imperfection in creation wasn't part of God's plan" means he's perfect? That sounds a little topsy-turvy.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from MD »
I am willing to bet my collection that Frozen and Solid are not on the same card. For example, Frozen Tomb and Solid Wall.
If Frozen Solid is not reprinted, you are aware that I'm quoting you in my sig for eternity?
It is the Muslims who regards Jesus as the last great prophet before Muhammed. Since Muslims believe in "One God" they reject that a man could be God; ergo, Jesus is not God. Thusly, Christianity is wrong. No messiah.
Though it is important to note that from a non-Christian perspective, someone could be the Messiah of Jewish prophecy without being God. In fact, if I'm not mistaken, Muslims believe precisely this.
EDIT: Yes, the Qur'an calls him al-Masīḥ.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
Though it is important to note that from a non-Christian perspective, someone could be the Messiah of Jewish prophecy without being God.
Very much so. The Jewish belief in a Messiah is a king from the line of David who will restore Israel to greatness and rule as God's anointed. Jesus is profoundly different from the traditions of a Jewish Messiah.
I'm certainly a little confused about Christianity, specifically its origins. I just want to get a Christian's perspective on this. Been meaning to ask this for a while now, actually.
Anyways, I took a course in social/cultural anthropology and we happened upon the idea of religion and various aspects of religion (such as symbolism, moral code, etc.). One of the most interesting aspects of that topic was the origins of religions themselves. My professor cited Christianity as a syncretic religion, a blending of symbolism and ideas from different religions such as Judaism. For example, the birth of Christ is celebrated on December 25th, which is taken directly from another religion (Bob Maher touched on this in his movie "Religulous", amongst a multitude of other things that Christianity took from other religions), whereas his real birth date was approximated to be in September. How does a Christian reconcile this issue?
Bear in mind that we distinguish Christianity and Judaism in a way that no one in the first or second century ever would have. Christianity was not perceived as being somehow separated from Judaism, it was seen as Judaism, and its Jewish followers were seen as Jews who followed Christ who is God's anointed, the Messiah spoken of by the Prophets.
So to say Christianity as a syncretistic religion from Judaism is a strange assertion. Christianity and Judaism were not perceived as separate entities until centuries later.
As Christianity went from being a group of Jews who were followers of Jesus to a mission that spread throughout both Jewish communities and to the Gentiles, to ultimately not just a recognized cult but the official religion of the Roman Empire, pagan holidays would be slowly changed in ways that would fit Christianity. St. Valentine's Day replaced a pagan Roman holiday, Easter became the celebration of the day Christ was resurrected, Christmas replaced the celebration of I believe the festival celebrating the god Mithras, who was a sun god, etc.
to be completely clear, I am not against Christmas Trees and Easter Egg hunts; however, I am 100% against them in Church as a religious expression. Two things come to mind for ritual: water babtism and communion. All others are fluff.
I mean, I agree that they're optional, but to dismiss them as fluff is a bit much in my opinion. Still, to each his own.
That is a very satisfying answer for the issue of Christmas and basically all of the other rituals of Christianity. I was, however, wondering more about Christianity's syncretic nature (i.e. many parts of the Bible itself is syncretic) and a Christian's reconciliation of this matter, citing Christmas as an example.
What specifically do you have problems with?
I don't see what needs to be reconciled about Christmas. Christmas is no longer a holiday of wonton debauchery like it used to be, and has instead become a holiday of gift giving, family, and peace and good will to all. I think most people understand that we have no idea when Jesus was born, and that we celebrate Christmas on December 25 because it replaces a holiday celebrating the birth of the sun.
I'm just not sure what needs to be reconciled about this.
A lot of the bible comes from judaism. were it breaks is with the issue of Christ. The jews never fully recognized Christ as the messiah. still many jews today see him more of a prophet than the messiah.
No, I'm pretty sure they don't regard Him as a prophet either, or maybe some do, but they definitely do not regard Him as the Messiah. That would make them Christian.
My understanding is the majority view of Judaism with regards to Jesus is that he was a rabbi and a miracle worker who preached in a manner that broke from Jewish traditions in several ways that they do not agree with, and claimed to be the Messiah but was not who the Messiah is supposed to be.
basically, I consider myself grafted into the vine: becoming through Jesus one of God's chosen people.
Oooh, I like that analogy.
Today we use the term Christian, although the core of it is that we are gentiles who become Jews.
Or Jews who followed Christ.
Since the Jews who didn't accept Jesus as the Messiah continued to reproduce, calling ourselves Jewish would be confusing to most people, so we don't. Thanks to the people of Antioch, the world uses Christian instead.
Well, I think the history is significantly more complicated and significantly more violent than that, but the schism definitely grew since the second century.
So from my understanding of what you have said, it means that you reconcile the issue that Christianity borrowed heavily from other religions (not just Judaism) that it is basically the same ideas and teachings.
Except Christianity didn't borrow heavily from other religions.
Replacing a pagan holiday with a day celebrating the Messiah or a saint is not borrowing heavily from other religions.
I think what you're trying to argue is that the Bible, the New Testament specifically, borrows heavily from other religions, and I've seen this argued before, and the arguments are almost always bogus, because they almost always try to make somersaults to say that Christianity is really a rehashing of X religion, as opposed to looking at Jewish traditions, which is what a Jewish movement of Jews in Jerusalem concerning a rabbi who is the Messiah would probably stem from.
No what i meant was i have seen christians quote 1 verse of scripture and then take the whole thing out of context as to make an arguement. You can't read the bible that way. verses go hand in hand and to get the meaning of one verse is you have to read the others.
actually you can, different interpretations of the bible lead to a split in creationists (YECs)
Because they interpreted the creation of the earth to be literal, 6 days
i guess you missed my point. different interpretations is fine it happens. what isn't fine is taking one verse of scripture and projecting something when that verse doesn't mean that. if and when you read the whole context of what the chapter is talking about then it means something completely different.
No, I'm pretty sure they don't regard Him as a prophet either, or maybe some do, but they definitely do not regard Him as the Messiah. That would make them Christian.
prophet was a bad word a teacher would have been better. No they do not regard him as the messiah. they were looking for the conquering messiah not the suffering messiah.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around. Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
i guess you missed my point. different interpretations is fine it happens. what isn't fine is taking one verse of scripture and projecting something when that verse doesn't mean that. if and when you read the whole context of what the chapter is talking about then it means something completely different.
prophet was a bad word a teacher would have been better. No they do not regard him as the messiah. they were looking for the conquering messiah not the suffering messiah.
Those people suffer from ridicule rather fast, the people i'm describing have a explanation behind their interpretation
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Neil Tyson is an awesome guy. I've heard him speak before on various podcasts and other media.
Anyways, I took a course in social/cultural anthropology and we happened upon the idea of religion and various aspects of religion (such as symbolism, moral code, etc.). One of the most interesting aspects of that topic was the origins of religions themselves. My professor cited Christianity as a syncretic religion, a blending of symbolism and ideas from different religions such as Judaism. For example, the birth of Christ is celebrated on December 25th, which is taken directly from another religion (Bob Maher touched on this in his movie "Religulous", amongst a multitude of other things that Christianity took from other religions), whereas his real birth date was approximated to be in September. How does a Christian reconcile this issue?
燃える時計秘密めく花の香り
www.pokemoncrossroads.com
Yeah, I got all that, but you also acknowledged the possibility you could be wrong about all that, which I believe was ALL BS was trying to say.
My what now?
My arguments have been anything but circular. When I have even been making arguments. I more asked questions then anything else on this thread. (which I believe was the point of it)
I don't think saying "mystery, could your tell me what begging the question is in your own words." is "making a circular argument," since its not even an argument, let alone a circular one.
Right, but that's what BS... oh nvm
I have no problem with the God of the Gaps argument. I use it all the time myself. I just was surprised to have mystery use it.
I watched the whole thing, and learned alot. Very good video, Im really sad that I have not seen it before.
Neil deGrasse Tyson on the God of the Gaps.
Really really fascinating conversations. I not only watched the whole thing, but I am now listening to it again as a backdrop to my work, I am at work.
I dislike the God of the Gaps argument.
See, when you come to the wits end of your knowledge, when you feel like you are at a loss, and just don't understand whats next, when you feel like you couldn't possibly discover the next piece in the puzzle.....THATS the moment for you to find the will power and conviction to keep pushing.
If you say, "gee, I cannot solve or figure out this problem, I give up, must be Gods work" you have abandoned the pursuit of knowledge.
Ignorance is bliss.....I disagree, but then, it is what people keep telling me.
Thanks to Xenphire @ Inkfox for the amazing new sig
“Thus strangely are our souls constructed, and by slight ligaments
are we bound to prosperity and ruin.”
― Mary Shelley, Frankenstein
How many times does this have to be said? I mean really this is getting old. this is the 1000th time that this has been posted and for the 1000th time it needs to be corrected.
Just because you know what is going to happen in the future does not mean that person is not making their own choices to get there. Pre-determinination says that your life is already planned out and you are just following that plan.
You life is not pre-planned. Just because i know what happens in the future for an event doesn't mean that person isn't going to make their own choices to get there.
I can say to you that having his creation introducing imperfection was not part of his plan. To say so means that God is not perfect which would be a logical flaw all on it's own.
just because he knows the future outcome of a decision doesn't mean that he is making those decisions for you.
Simple these holiday's were taken over so as to expand the influence of the roman church. so they started incorporating the celebrations with pagan holidays to spread influence.
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around.
Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
That is a very satisfying answer for the issue of Christmas and basically all of the other rituals of Christianity. I was, however, wondering more about Christianity's syncretic nature (i.e. many parts of the Bible itself is syncretic) and a Christian's reconciliation of this matter, citing Christmas as an example.
燃える時計秘密めく花の香り
www.pokemoncrossroads.com
the bible borrows very heavily from judaism though. It breaks away more in the new testament with the fact that christ was who he said he was verses a prophet.
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around.
Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
So from my understanding of what you have said, it means that you reconcile the issue that Christianity borrowed heavily from other religions (not just Judaism) that it is basically the same ideas and teachings. Therefore under these circumstances, it doesn't really matter where it came from? That makes good sense as well. :3
That seems quite a satisfying answer. Thanks.
燃える時計秘密めく花の香り
www.pokemoncrossroads.com
Oh nvm i thought you were implying something when you said christian's should know better. I always thought it should be people should know better
No what i meant was i have seen christians quote 1 verse of scripture and then take the whole thing out of context as to make an arguement. You can't read the bible that way. verses go hand in hand and to get the meaning of one verse is you have to read the others.
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around.
Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
But God is all-knowing. All-knowing. He knew all possible Creations and created this one. He chose this single world out of an infinity of possibilities and made it real.
It's not that he knew in advance what we'd do. It's that he looked at all of the possibilities and chose the one we exist in, where we make the choices we have/do/will.
So God, omniscient and omnipotent, accidentally made something imperfect. Please. That sounds like saying he's not perfect (which apparently is a logical flaw).
And to say "imperfection in creation was part of God's plan" means that God is not perfect, but to say "imperfection in creation wasn't part of God's plan" means he's perfect? That sounds a little topsy-turvy.
Though it is important to note that from a non-Christian perspective, someone could be the Messiah of Jewish prophecy without being God. In fact, if I'm not mistaken, Muslims believe precisely this.
EDIT: Yes, the Qur'an calls him al-Masīḥ.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
Very much so. The Jewish belief in a Messiah is a king from the line of David who will restore Israel to greatness and rule as God's anointed. Jesus is profoundly different from the traditions of a Jewish Messiah.
Bear in mind that we distinguish Christianity and Judaism in a way that no one in the first or second century ever would have. Christianity was not perceived as being somehow separated from Judaism, it was seen as Judaism, and its Jewish followers were seen as Jews who followed Christ who is God's anointed, the Messiah spoken of by the Prophets.
So to say Christianity as a syncretistic religion from Judaism is a strange assertion. Christianity and Judaism were not perceived as separate entities until centuries later.
As Christianity went from being a group of Jews who were followers of Jesus to a mission that spread throughout both Jewish communities and to the Gentiles, to ultimately not just a recognized cult but the official religion of the Roman Empire, pagan holidays would be slowly changed in ways that would fit Christianity. St. Valentine's Day replaced a pagan Roman holiday, Easter became the celebration of the day Christ was resurrected, Christmas replaced the celebration of I believe the festival celebrating the god Mithras, who was a sun god, etc.
I mean, I agree that they're optional, but to dismiss them as fluff is a bit much in my opinion. Still, to each his own.
What specifically do you have problems with?
I don't see what needs to be reconciled about Christmas. Christmas is no longer a holiday of wonton debauchery like it used to be, and has instead become a holiday of gift giving, family, and peace and good will to all. I think most people understand that we have no idea when Jesus was born, and that we celebrate Christmas on December 25 because it replaces a holiday celebrating the birth of the sun.
I'm just not sure what needs to be reconciled about this.
No, I'm pretty sure they don't regard Him as a prophet either, or maybe some do, but they definitely do not regard Him as the Messiah. That would make them Christian.
My understanding is the majority view of Judaism with regards to Jesus is that he was a rabbi and a miracle worker who preached in a manner that broke from Jewish traditions in several ways that they do not agree with, and claimed to be the Messiah but was not who the Messiah is supposed to be.
Oooh, I like that analogy.
Or Jews who followed Christ.
Well, I think the history is significantly more complicated and significantly more violent than that, but the schism definitely grew since the second century.
Except Christianity didn't borrow heavily from other religions.
Replacing a pagan holiday with a day celebrating the Messiah or a saint is not borrowing heavily from other religions.
I think what you're trying to argue is that the Bible, the New Testament specifically, borrows heavily from other religions, and I've seen this argued before, and the arguments are almost always bogus, because they almost always try to make somersaults to say that Christianity is really a rehashing of X religion, as opposed to looking at Jewish traditions, which is what a Jewish movement of Jews in Jerusalem concerning a rabbi who is the Messiah would probably stem from.
actually you can, different interpretations of the bible lead to a split in creationists (YECs)
Because they interpreted the creation of the earth to be literal, 6 days
It is 6 days in God's time whatever that equates to. other verses in the new testament say a day is as if 1000 years in heaven.
so it could be that he took 6000 years then another 1000 years to rest plus the rest of what we know. another site estimated at 100K years.
the critical question here is what is a day to God. no one really knows.
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around.
Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
and thats why theres different interpretations
i guess you missed my point. different interpretations is fine it happens. what isn't fine is taking one verse of scripture and projecting something when that verse doesn't mean that. if and when you read the whole context of what the chapter is talking about then it means something completely different.
prophet was a bad word a teacher would have been better. No they do not regard him as the messiah. they were looking for the conquering messiah not the suffering messiah.
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around.
Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
Those people suffer from ridicule rather fast, the people i'm describing have a explanation behind their interpretation