Disproving the christian (and muslim) god

[The Grand Nudger]

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

Garbage, lol.

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

 Those that weren't cut and dry polytheists were..like yahweh cultists, henotheists. Henotheism has, traditionally, been the bridge between earlier forms of polytheism and later forms of monotheism.

[Fake Messiah]

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

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

 Those that weren't cut and dry polytheists were..like yahweh cultists, henotheists.  Henotheism has, traditionally, been the bridge between earlier forms of polytheism and later forms of monotheism.

Christianity is not monotheism, nor it is polytheism. Christianity is henotheism - meaning that only one deity among many should be worshiped because Christians still believe in a host of supernatural beings, particularly angels and the devil. They are beings created by the one all-powerful Creator - just as the Egyptian deities were the product of the one all powerful Egyptian Creator.

[GrandizerII]

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.

This isn't a good example of strict monotheism (see Hinduism/Brahmanism for a similar sort of theistic belief). And the historical facts, overall, are clear. The trend was from polytheism to monotheism, not the other way around. So your faith-derived "theory" regarding the evolution of theistic beliefs is misguided.

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)

The Old Testament makes no prediction that the Messiah would be born of a virgin woman, be crucified for our sins, and then rise from the dead three days later. If you don't believe me, again, ask the Jews. They would know the Tanakh better than you do.

[Huggy Bear]

The Old Testament makes no prediction that the Messiah would be born of a virgin woman,

You mean other than the obvious one?

Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. - Isaiah 7:14

How about this one:

And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. - Genesis 3:15

Here God is speaking to the serpent and he mentions the seed of the woman, normally women do not have seed, the seed comes from the man. God gave the woman a seed, which was Jesus Christ through the virgin birth.

be crucified for our sins,

But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. - Isaiah 53:5

and then rise from the dead three days later.

For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. - Psalm 16:10

In other words he'd raise hum up before his body started to decay, which is within 72 hours (3 days).

If you don't believe me, again, ask the Jews. They would know the Tanakh better than you do.

Who exactly do you thing wrote the New Testament?

[The Grand Nudger]

Certainly not any "god" or "christ", nor...for that matter, did jews write it.......... 

Jews, you see..require no further "testaments". When the messiah comes, that's that. It was the christian religions failure to satisfy the conditions of judaic prophecy, combined with the political reality of empire and clergy, in the overall context of hellenic syncretism....that necessitated the revisions you now credulously refer to as "The New Testament".

Obviously, I don't explain this for your benefit....you have a religious compulsion to re-imagine history and religion, similar to the one expressed in the NT.

[I_am_not_mafia]

If you don't believe me, again, ask the Jews. They would know the Tanakh better than you do.

Who exactly do you thing wrote the New Testament?

No idea. Please tell us.

[Aegon]

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...

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?

Do we only consult historians when we agree with them?

[I_am_not_mafia]

Do we only consult historians when we agree with them?

In the same way that theists only refer to science on the rare occasions when they think they can use it to back-up their beliefs,

[Huggy Bear]

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....

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

Do we only consult historians when we agree with them?

Assuming you're talking about Nefertiti, this is not a case of disagreement, you have to ignore plenty of sources from antiquity to conclude that Nefertiti was a white woman.



Those are clearly African features if I ever saw any.

[The Grand Nudger]

Take it up with the Biblical Archaeology Review, Hugs.  Those, for reference..are the "historians" that made a kerfuffle over nefertiti being "white".  

Actual historians will tell you that egypt was a multi racial society at the crossroads of "black" africa and "white" eurasia and that determining the ethnicity of some specific royal is not only difficult, but entirely pointless.  I'd love to hear more about her clearly negroid features, though...that shit is hilarious.