RE: Is Christianity based on older myths?
February 4, 2015 at 6:36 pm
(This post was last modified: February 4, 2015 at 6:46 pm by SteveII.)
(February 4, 2015 at 5:45 pm)Cato Wrote:(February 4, 2015 at 4:00 pm)SteveII Wrote: Access to the details of extinct and eastern religions would have to be explained for this to be plausible.
So you find it implausible that a literate man navigating the most educated class in his society is ignorant of eastern religious tradition, but find it perfectly acceptable that Persian, Arabian, and Indian Magi followed a fucking star to dole out jewelry and perfume as the first ever gifts of Christmas?
I think it unlikely that his education included knowledge of gods and godesses of extinct and eastern religious to a point where he could pick this myth and that myth and cobble together enough pieces to warrant the charge that Christianity is recycling old myths as something new.
You don't have a comment as to what might be the motive for such an undertaking?
(February 4, 2015 at 4:47 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote:(February 4, 2015 at 4:00 pm)SteveII Wrote: If Christianity was a recycling of old myths, then it all had to be developed and synthesized between Jesus' death and the writing of Paul's letters or at the latest the gospels a few years later. That would be an impressive undertaking resulting in a systematic theologyOn the contrary, once you realize that Jesus Christ of Nazareth and Bethlehem is not a historical figure and the Gospels aren't recording actual events, there is no time frame for fictional Jesus' death. The bottom falls out, and we are left with documents that represent the development of putting into writing their mysteries that may have been evolving for many decades, on top of the lapse of decades already conceded by Christian apologists.
You are in a minority (perhaps even on this forum) since most scholars have not come to realize Jesus was not a historical figure.
(February 4, 2015 at 4:51 pm)Rhythm Wrote:(February 4, 2015 at 4:00 pm)SteveII Wrote: 1. Be compatible with OT monotheistic doctrine of God-it isn't.
Quote:2. Be compatible with OT prophecies-it isn't
Quote:3. Be internally consistent-it isn't
Quote:4. and since most of you believe that Jesus actually/probably existed, had to be compatible with what the people knew to be true about Jesus--whom Paul never net.-he didn't...and it isn't.
All insightful replies.
Are you saying that Christianity is not compatible with the OT? In what way? And how is Christianity not internally consistent?
Concerning Jesus, are you making the minority claim he didn't exist.