Why are other civilizations ignored in the Bible?

[Sword of Christ]

Poor and humble people are everywhere, just saying.

He had an entire oppressed culture kept as slaves to work with there so what better medium to deliver his message to humanity as a whole? From this people the Messiah would eventually come to spread the word of God to the Gentiles. The Jews were expecting a great king and military leader them into victory over their oppressors though that isn't quite how it turned out.

could have had a Jesus in every country, and cut out all this confusion and the deaths he knew would result from ideological conflicts over this right then and there. He just didn't.

There wouldn't be a great deal of point doing that if you could spread the religion Jesus founded to every country in the world this isn't a message for one culture of people but a universal message equally for everyone. You get some amount of conflict because not everyone wants to accept it but Jesus knew the strife his message would cause in the future.


"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword." Matthew 10:34

You see, like it was all planned out a ahead of time. Though I suppose you're still insisting it was "all made up"?

So why no Chinese Jesus?

They had Lao Tzu and Confucius delivered teachings similar to Jesus such as the Golden Rule. So some basic guidance from God was there in ancient China.

"When abroad, behaveto everyone as if interviewing
an honored guest; in directing the people, act as if
you were assisting at a great sacrafice; DO NOT DO
TO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD NOT LIKE DONE
TO YOURSELF: so there will be no murmuring
against you in the country, and none in the family;
your public life will arouse no ill-will nor your private
life any resentment."

Yuuup, and according to your doctrine most of them are going to hell for not believing in Jesus

You will go to hell for rejecting God who happened to be Jesus, hell being a separation from God. But seeing as God will have had some input in other faiths I don't see any reason why they would necessarily be rejecting God or his moral guidance. Even atheists accept Christianity and Christ in terms of morality even if they believe some bull about multiple universes that spawn other universe with blackholes or whatever.

, and the rest might be going to hell for various things they don't consider sins but your denomination does.

I don't even believe people of other faiths are going to hell, you only go to hell if you reject God and this is entirely voluntary. The same way say Satan would be rejecting God, Satan does of course believe the Christian God exists. There is more to it than merely what you believe you have entirely the wrong idea.

Don't try this generic god equivocation, it's intensely dishonest.

God has certainly been a guiding hand in all of human history as I have outlined above. The central event God played in history was with his Covenant to his chosen people to who he revealed himself to them as a people as a whole at mount Sinai. Nothing like like ever happened before in any other religion. Exactly what they experienced is something that will of course remain forever outside the bounds of science of course.

[StuW]

The story goes God heard their cry when they were being oppressed as slaves in Egypt and decided to free them from bondage, form a covenant with them and give them their promised land in Israel. God likes to get his message across from the poor and humble portion of humanity much like how Jesus was a low status carpenter from Galilee.

The Torah devotes more than four books to the proposition that the Israelites came to Canaan after having been subjugated in Egypt for generations, and yet there is no archaeological evidence to support that they were ever in Egypt. A prolonged Egyptian stay should have left Egyptian elements in the material culture, such as the pottery found in the early Israelite settlements in Canaan, but there are none.

In short, the traditions of servitude in Egypt, the tales of the Israelites wandering in the desert, and the stories of the conquest of the promised land all appear to be fictitious.

http://reformjudaismmag.org/Articles/index.cfm?id=3184

[Sword of Christ]

I'm aware we don't know for sure who or what exactly the stories were initially based upon and there is a good reason not believe the Biblical account is word for word historically accurate. Nonetheless real locations, civilizations and historical people and events are somewhere at the heart of it. some of it won't necessarily leave much of an archaeological trace.

[Esquilax]

I'm aware we don't know for sure who or what exactly the stories were initially based upon and there is a good reason not believe the Biblical account is word for word historically accurate. Nonetheless real locations, civilizations and historical people and events are somewhere at the heart of it. some of it won't necessarily leave much of an archaeological trace.

Just "good reason." You never provide any resources at any point! It's all just assertion after assertion!

He had an entire oppressed culture kept as slaves to work with there so what better medium to deliver his message to humanity as a whole? From this people the Messiah would eventually come to spread the word of God to the Gentiles. The Jews were expecting a great king and military leader them into victory over their oppressors though that isn't quite how it turned out.

Leaving aside that the Jewish slavery in Egypt never happened, you still aren't answering the question, you're just explaining the problem: telling me what the bible describes doesn't tell us why the obviously superior alternative didn't happen.

There wouldn't be a great deal of point doing that if you could spread the religion Jesus founded to every country in the world this isn't a message for one culture of people but a universal message equally for everyone. You get some amount of conflict because not everyone wants to accept it but Jesus knew the strife his message would cause in the future.

The concept of a universal message is entirely undermined by the fact that it was so selectively deployed and took centuries to reach the entire world, when the messenger was entirely capable of doing it in an actually universal manner.

And did you ever think that some of the conflict in the world was due to the fact that the entirely convincing presence of the messiah didn't occur in those conflicted corners of the world?

They had Lao Tzu and Confucius delivered teachings similar to Jesus such as the Golden Rule. So some basic guidance from God was there in ancient China.

Gotta love that cultural re-appropriation, you scumbag.

Leaving aside the absolute, unfounded assertion you just made, you still haven't answered the question: why did China not get a messiah to spread the message of god through their area simultaneous with Jesus?

You will go to hell for rejecting God who happened to be Jesus, hell being a separation from God. But seeing as God will have had some input in other faiths I don't see any reason why they would necessarily be rejecting God or his moral guidance. Even atheists accept Christianity and Christ in terms of morality even if they believe some bull about multiple universes that spawn other universe with blackholes or whatever.

Alright, you've been told over and over about this, and I've just had it. I've had it with your refusal to listen, with your inability to let go of bare assertions... it's horribly frustrating.

And yet for some reason you run from my debate challenge...

God has certainly been a guiding hand in all of human history as I have outlined above. The central event God played in history was with his Covenant to his chosen people to who he revealed himself to them as a people as a whole at mount Sinai. Nothing like like ever happened before in any other religion. Exactly what they experienced is something that will of course remain forever outside the bounds of science of course.

More bare assertions. Yawn.

[Bad Wolf]

[Sword of Christ]

Just "good reason." You never provide any resources at any point! It's all just assertion after assertion!

The Bible is fully historically accurate in it's depictions of historical locations, rulers and peoples and their cultures, archaeology and recorded history backs all these details. You would find the events of the Exodus in the archaeological record had it been on the scale the Bible describes but we can say they added to the drama a little and that's not quite what happened. Much of history is vague and lost to us anyway we only have a rough approximation, particularly when you're dealing with pre-literate cultures.

Leaving aside that the Jewish slavery in Egypt never happened

The Egyptians kept slaves so the ancestors of the Jewish people may well have been kept as slaves. They may not have been defined ethnic group at this point so no-one at the time will have noticed.

, you still aren't answering the question, you're just explaining the problem: telling me what the bible describes doesn't tell us why the obviously superior alternative didn't happen.

What is the obviously superior alternative and what makes it superior?

The concept of a universal message is entirely undermined by the fact that it was so selectively deployed and took centuries to reach the entire world

It took time and effort to do as all good things worth doing take.

when the messenger was entirely capable of doing it in an actually universal manner.

In his Earthly life he was confined to his geographical area in his resurrected life he covers the entire world. Christianity began life as a movement within Judaism but the universal nature and importance of the message to all humanity was apparent.

And did you ever think that some of the conflict in the world was due to the fact that the entirely convincing presence of the messiah didn't occur in those conflicted corners of the world?

He's convincing enough just not for people like yourself who seek to deny him but you're allowed to due to the fact you have your own freedom of choice.

Gotta love that cultural re-appropriation, you scumbag.

This is only cultural re-appropriation if you don't believe God was a guiding hand in human history and all religious faith was made up bull. But I'm not saying this therefore I'm not appropriating anything I'm saying you will find God speaking to various people throughout history and you can see the common ground between the various world faiths.

Leaving aside the absolute, unfounded assertion you just made

I can back my assertions up with reasoning and evidence you're the one making unfounded assertions. I haven't seen you support anything you say with reason or supply any evidence, you state opinions as fact as atheists do because that's all you have.

you still haven't answered the question: why did China not get a messiah to spread the message of god through their area simultaneous with Jesus?

They did the Messiah being Jesus Christ and they're accepting Christianity in ever increasing numbers today, Christianity even spread there in the 7th century. Christianity is for all humanity equally you see it's not a tribal/racial thing. It doesn't mean God ignored them before that though he had a hand in their culture, beliefs and history as he did with everyone else. Find me one atheist culture or civilization.

Alright, you've been told over and over about this, and I've just had it. I've had it with your refusal to listen, with your inability to let go of bare assertions... it's horribly frustrating.

You're the one making bare assertions I'm providing reasoning and historical evidence and facts. You are ignoring it and providing nothing of substance to counter it. I'm open to decent well thought out counter argument presented in a civilized way without ad hominems, accusations of things I'm not doing and name calling. You know you're losing the argument when you resort to that.

And yet for some reason you run from my debate challenge...

If you have a genuine debate on some kind of an interesting point that's great but I'm still waiting for you to present this.

More bare assertions. Yawn.

It's a point of view based on the evidence of human history and the revelation of scripture but you have an objection and an alternative idea with evidence and reasoning to support it in opposition to this feel free to present it. So far you have done no such thing.

[catman]

I'm sure God spoke to people from other cultures as well and this had some influence in the formation of other world faiths.

Not your God though.

[pocaracas]

I'm sure God spoke to people from other cultures as well and this had some influence in the formation of other world faiths.

Not your God though.

Sure he did... look, here's proof!

[Bad Wolf]

The Bible is fully historically accurate in it's depictions of historical locations, rulers and peoples and their cultures, archaeology and recorded history backs all these details.

Internal consistency means absolutely jack shit. Spiderman lives in New York city. Does spiderman exist?

[Minimalist]

Why was there only one Jesus? If Yahweh was trying to save the whole planet, why only send down one guy? Why did he only beget one son, thousands of years after Humans have been around, to teach in some backwater hole instead of the great schools of the more advanced civilizations?

Christianity spread through the Roman empire like a wild fire and was the dominate religion before the Roman empire fell, how's that for getting the message out.

GC

Xtianity spread because the emperor wanted it so....had nothing to do with your fucking silly god or his absurd dogma. Be very proud, G-C. Your shit was imposed by force.

---

Would you have accepted the Bible as the word of God if it had included historical information about every (or at least more than one) region/civilization? I ask this because your argument assumes that the word of God would focus on more than one specific region of the entire planet and since the Bible doesn't, it can't be the real word of God. Is this what you believe?