Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Bobby Havicon on December 28, 2011 at 1:22pm

Hmm... I suppose so, but I'm still wondering why anybody would bother to change the name. What did they have against Horus?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by sway austin on January 2, 2012 at 3:02am

How come Jesus himself would have left nothing in the way of writing? I've always found this odd. The four gospels were written by folks that (likely...) never met Christ. Reality is, one could go as far as to argue Christ himself maybe never even existed at all. Outside of the bible (which doesn't serve as solid evidence) there is very little documentation of his existence from the time he actually/apparently existed. For me this speaks volumes.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bobby Havicon on January 2, 2012 at 10:06am

If he did leave any writings, what is the likelihood anyone would accept them as being authentic? He would have to do something miraculous to get people to realize that they are authentic, like writing on gold tablets and appearing to a guy in upstate NY to show them where they are at. Although I suspect if he did that we would still find ways to doubt their authenticity. ;)

The Christian response, however, is that he departed so the Spirit could come and indwell and communicate directly in such a manner that the writers were inspired when they wrote the scriptures. How do the Christians know that happened? The Bible says so! And around and around we go.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by sway austin on January 2, 2012 at 11:44pm

Certainly leaving something in the way of writing that some might regard as authentic wouldn't be nearly as miraculous as turning water into wine or any of that silliness?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by erik112358 on January 2, 2012 at 10:43am

Maybe carpenters were illiterate in those days.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Artor on January 2, 2012 at 11:28am

Because the resurrection story was already a common element in many near-east religions. By appropriating it into the new Xtian myths, followers of other faiths could be convinced that maybe Jesus was another manifestation of their old deity, and it would be okay to go along with the story. They didn't invent the resurrection, they stole the idea. There is very little new to Xtianity.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bobby Havicon on December 28, 2011 at 9:56am

Thanks Kir. But if he didn't exist, why start the myth that he did? What did the early Jewish and Roman converts gain from the creation of this myth? I think one could make the case that Islam unified many Arab tribes and provided justification for aquiring land. The same could be said for Judaism. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bobby Havicon on December 28, 2011 at 1:25pm

Yeah, I suppose that's possible. Shoot, I guess fishing would get old. Why not attempt global mind control by creating a new religion? ;)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chrono-Synclastic Infundibulum on December 28, 2011 at 2:33pm

Why are there stories of Achilles? What motivation did the Greeks have for believing he was some invincible son of Peleus? Was he a real person who did the deeds that the myths speak of or did someone fabricate them? Or is it just possible that Achilles might have been a real person- some strong warrior- whom was greatly respected; rumors started about him killing 30 people single-handed; 30 became 100; 100 became 1000...etc? Why are any mythical heroes made? And why are actual people often made far greater in tale than they ever were in deed?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bobby Havicon on December 28, 2011 at 3:44pm

Yes, I think that could be it. I found an article on the Infidels site that basically makes the same claim. Supposedly it wasn't all that uncommon for myths to develop around popular personages, even myths culminating in an alleged divinity for the personage.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dale Headley on December 28, 2011 at 1:07pm

  If you read this entire post, you may notice that it is chock full of a priori assumptions.  It is circular reason at its worst - like saying the Bible is true because the Bible says it is true.  If you haven't read it, yet, don't bother.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by A.C. Thomas on January 16, 2012 at 8:17am

I gave up on the first sentence of his first point. The idea that everything requires a creator is fatally flawed, in that whatever that creator was, would need a creator, and would've existed outside of the existence he had yet to create.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page