Disproving the christian (and muslim) god

[Huggy Bear]

I Love it when I get to 'quote mine' myself.

The Christian doctrine of the Resurrection is not a denomination-based doctrine, lol. Neither is the birth of Jesus of a virgin. You adhere to these doctrines, don't you? And yet, people are arguing that these doctrines evolved from prior pagan myths. And, despite my previous post, they're not necessarily 100% wrong. You get that this is what they're arguing about, right?

Uh, no

I'm talking about the whole queen of heaven bit which originally started with Semiramis.

As far as Christian doctrines evolving from Prior pagan myths... polytheism evolved from monotheism, not the other way around.

[GrandizerII]

The Christian doctrine of the Resurrection is not a denomination-based doctrine, lol. Neither is the birth of Jesus of a virgin. You adhere to these doctrines, don't you? And yet, people are arguing that these doctrines evolved from prior pagan myths. And, despite my previous post, they're not necessarily 100% wrong. You get that this is what they're arguing about, right?

Uh, no

I'm talking about the whole queen of heaven bit which originally started with Semiramis.

And they're referring to the Resurrection doctrine.

As far as Christian doctrines evolving from Prior pagan myths... polytheism evolved from monotheism, not the other way around.

Even if that was historically true (which it's not, according to historians of religion), polytheism still came about before Jesus. You get this, right?

[Huggy Bear]

Uh, no

I'm talking about the whole queen of heaven bit which originally started with Semiramis.

And they're referring to the Resurrection doctrine.

As far as Christian doctrines evolving from Prior pagan myths... polytheism evolved from monotheism, not the other way around.

Even if that was historically true (which it's not, according to historians of religion),

Well according to historians, Nefertiti was white...

Think about it logically for a second, according to your point of view, a god is a man made construct, so it doesn't make any sense to skip the concept of one god, and start at many that's a lot more backstory to come up with on the fly.

You start at one and add to it from there...

Even Christianity has went from one God to a trinity... to a pantheon of saints....

polytheism still came about before Jesus. You get this, right?

You get that the whole bible cover to cover is about Jesus, right?

[Foxaèr]

Think about it logically for a second, according to your point of view, a god is a man made construct, so it doesn't make any sense to skip the concept of one god and start at many that's a lot more backstory to come up with on the fly.

It doesn't matter that logically one would assume the natural order to have been one god (monotheism) and gradually many (polytheism). Religious history shows that prior to the monotheistic Judeo-christian religions, animism and paganism saw spirits and gods, plural, in nature. Heck, even the Greek, Roman, and Egyptian pantheon predate monotheism.

[GrandizerII]

And they're referring to the Resurrection doctrine.


Even if that was historically true (which it's not, according to historians of religion),

Well according to historians, Nefertiti was white...

So? I didn't say historians are going to get every single detail right. And that's assuming Nefertiti wasn't white, and that historians do state that she was white. I'm not familiar enough with this subject to say anything else about it, so moving on ...

Think about it logically for a second, according to your point of view, a god is a man made construct, so it doesn't make any sense to skip the concept of one god, and start at many that's a lot more backstory to come up with on the fly.

You start at one and add to it from there...

Even Christianity has went from one God to a trinity... to a pantheon of saints....

100% what Lutrinae said, so I'm not going to repeat it here.

polytheism still came about before Jesus. You get this, right?

You get that the whole bible cover to cover is about Jesus, right?

Oh, really. You should ask the Jews to see if that's true.

[downbeatplumb]

My argument is that the chrstian god (and also the muslim god) is a myth formed from older myths and is in no way original, it cannot be the truth, making the christian god not real.

Discuss ...

That's another discussion, we're talking Odin.

---

Like I said, that's another discussion.

[SteveII]

It's pretty easy to show that any being in charge with the following characteristics is not a logical possibility:

A) Has no restrictions on its abilities
B) Has our best interests in mind and isn't sadistic

1) Suffering occurs.
2) The being can go about achieving any goals it might have, including looking after our best interests, any way it wants.
3) The being chooses the way things happen (or at least the things that can possibly happen).
4) The being chooses suffering to be involved, when it could achieve everything it wanted in other ways.
5) The being is the cause of unecessary suffering which serves no purpose.
6) The being is a sadist.

So a person making such a claim needs to drop either A or B. Funnily enough, people seem more eager to drop B. Many have openly said that they don't care if God is sadistic, they will still worship it.

You are just making the age old Problem of Evil argument. 

Your A is wrong. Giving free will to humans imposes a restriction on his abilities. (called the Free Will Defense).

Your B is not well formed: God may have morally justified reasons to ALLOW evil if it results in a greater good (like more people heaven). This is called the Greater Good defense.

In a nutshell, atheist philosophers no longer consider this to be a logical problem with God because the two defenses are sufficient to defeat the argument.

[Huggy Bear]

Think about it logically for a second, according to your point of view, a god is a man made construct, so it doesn't make any sense to skip the concept of one god and start at many that's a lot more backstory to come up with on the fly.

It doesn't matter that logically one would assume the natural order to have been one god (monotheism) and gradually many (polytheism).  Religious history shows that prior to the monotheistic Judeo-christian religions, animism and paganism saw spirits and gods, plural, in nature.  Heck, even the Greek, Roman, and Egyptian pantheon predate monotheism.

That's nonsense because plenty of native American tribes were every bit monotheists

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Spirit

The Great Spirit, known as Wakan Tanka among the Sioux, Gitche Manitou in Algonquian, and in many Native American and First Nation cultures as The Creator, is the supreme being, God, or a conception of universal spiritual force.

---

You get that the whole bible cover to cover is about Jesus, right?

Oh, really. You should ask the Jews to see if that's true.

Where do you think the concept of "Messiah" came from? Not to mention the old testament is clear the Messiah would be rejected.

“The stone which the builders rejected has become the chief cornerstone. This was the LORD's doing; it is marvelous in our eyes.” (Psalm 118:22-23)

[vorlon13]

Father son and Holy Ghost are simultaneously polytheism and monotheism.

(outside of Mormonism, and no one knows, not even the Mormons, what they believe about the Trinity)

[Foxaèr]

Father son and Holy Ghost are simultaneously polytheism and monotheism.

(outside of Mormonism, and no one knows, not even the Mormons, what they believe about the Trinity)

A hot gay threesome probably.