Greetings From Earthling

[Earthling]

I totally agree with you on this, I think that the main branches of Christianity today are based on the religion Constantine and his cronies (re)created in the fourth century. My problem is that I don't think there's anything in Judaism and Christianity that you can't trace back to earlier philosophies and religions. Even the Christian idea of God itself is very similar to that found in Greek philosophy, and the concept of a Son of God is also something we find in Hellenic religion. Plus the majority of the teachings of Jesus are found in earlier Greek philosophy too.

While I think it is important and fairly easy to gauge the infiltration of apostasy in the history of modern Christendom, I think it becomes a great deal less important or impressive beyond that. There are all kinds of factors you have to consider. Take a vague concept like god, meaning simple "mighty; strong" and applied to anything or anyone thought to be mighty or venerated. Its not surprising that similar concepts are found elsewhere. Take something like the pagan origin of baptism, predating Christianity. Well it was used as a public declaration. Nothing inherently Christian about that. Take the common use of specific gods in the makeup of our weekly and monthly calendar, then consider the ancient Jewish calendar. Influences become vague and insubstantial, they sound a great deal more impressive than they actually are.

The same influences that resulted in the apostasy of Christianity have undoubtedly influenced pagan mythology as well. So you say you find a son of god who was born on December 25th and was crucified etc. before Christ then you discover that neither one of them actually were born at that time or crucified and there were prophecies about a son of god or certain events that were around thousands of years before Christ anyway. They were waiting for him for some time.

Speaking of time, it is often cited by skeptics as an indication that the Bible is less than what it says it is, but there are flaws in secular history far greater than that of the Bible.

oh, and I'm glad you've reached your ten posts. Sorry, it was partly my fault too, I shouldn't have weighed into a debate til you'd hit your tenth post.

Thanks, all water under the bridge, as they say. Its all good.

[McQ]

So now this thread can be continued elsewhere than in the intro section. Go to it, gang!

[Too Few Lions]

I totally agree with you on this, I think that the main branches of Christianity today are based on the religion Constantine and his cronies (re)created in the fourth century. My problem is that I don't think there's anything in Judaism and Christianity that you can't trace back to earlier philosophies and religions. Even the Christian idea of God itself is very similar to that found in Greek philosophy, and the concept of a Son of God is also something we find in Hellenic religion. Plus the majority of the teachings of Jesus are found in earlier Greek philosophy too.

While I think it is important and fairly easy to gauge the infiltration of apostasy in the history of modern Christendom, I think it becomes a great deal less important or impressive beyond that. There are all kinds of factors you have to consider. Take a vague concept like god, meaning simple "mighty; strong" and applied to anything or anyone thought to be mighty or venerated. Its not surprising that similar concepts are found elsewhere. Take something like the pagan origin of baptism, predating Christianity. Well it was used as a public declaration. Nothing inherently Christian about that. Take the common use of specific gods in the makeup of our weekly and monthly calendar, then consider the ancient Jewish calendar. Influences become vague and insubstantial, they sound a great deal more impressive than they actually are.

The same influences that resulted in the apostasy of Christianity have undoubtedly influenced pagan mythology as well. So you say you find a son of god who was born on December 25th and was crucified etc. before Christ then you discover that neither one of them actually were born at that time or crucified and there were prophecies about a son of god or certain events that were around thousands of years before Christ anyway. They were waiting for him for some time.

I just don't know what part of Judaism or Christianity was original and wasn't influenced by earlier external religions and philosophies. Could you give me some examples? Judaism itself evolved out of Canaanite religion.

Thus I also don't see any 'apostasy' in Christianity, or any real division between Christian, Jew and 'pagan'. These are false divisions created by Christains who tried to claim their god was somehow different from all the other gods. For me they're all theists worshipping different gods, but all using the same mythology, cosmology and philosophy to underpin their beliefs.

[Too Few Lions]

I was thinking more the stories that were once considered historical, but which archaeology has shown are just myths, eg the Flood or the Exodus.

In the case of a worldwide deluge, what could we expect to see? We have indication that the oceans were smaller and continents larger, we have river channels extending out far under the oceans. It is believed that the mountains in the distant past were much lower, some mountains have been pushed up from under the seas. There is ten times as much water by volume in the oceans as there is land above sea level. If it were dumped evenly in the see the water would cover the entire earth 1 and 1/2 miles deep.

The water vapor canopy that was raised earlier in Genesis chapter 1, would have protected the inhabitants of earth from harmful radiation, resulting in shorter lifespans after the flood. The change in radiation would also have altered the rate of formation of radioactive carbon-14, invalidating all dates prior to the flood. 2 tons of water per square inch would have formed new mountains, raised old mountains to new heights, deepened shallow sea basins, created new shorelines, and fossilized fauna and flora quickly.

The canopy would have allowed for a global tropical to sub-tropical climate, the sudden devastation would have changed dramatically the climate very quickly. There would be the remains of mammoths and rhinoceroses being discovered in odd places with vegetation in their frozen mouth and stomachs. In Siberian cliffs and Alaskan ice. Lions, tigers, bears, and elk would be found in common strata indicating a simultaneous destruction.

Flood stories would spread out with the scattering of people throughout the globe. Folklore from the Chinese, Druids, Egyptians, Greeks, Eskimos, Greenlanders, Africans, Hindus, Native Americans . . .

You seriously believe in the Flood?   And that archaeological evidence supports there being a flood? I have a degree in archaeology, and to be totally honest with you, that's possibly the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. I don't think you'll find a reputable archaeologist in the whole world who'd agree with you. There's absolutely no archaeological evidence to support the theory of a worldwide deluge.

We can trace the myth back to ancient Mesopotamia in the second / third millennium BCE. There's no evidence for it being much older than that. The Jews borrowed the myth from earlier religions / cultures. Do you believe the flood happened then? Are you a young earth creationist? Do you believe that the Earth is flat (the writers of the earliest parts of Genesis did)?

Even if you do seriously believe there was a worldwide global deluge 4000 odd years ago,  how do you know it was your god who caused it? According to the Greeks, Zeus sent the Flood, not Yahweh. You're basing your beliefs on one piece of mythology but ignoring other mythologies which are no less valid.

As for the Exodus, how much archaeological evidence would one expect from a nomadic people traveling through the wilderness beginning in 1513 B.C.E. who didn't make towns, didn't establish villages.  

Given that these wanderings supposedly happened in a desert, where archaeological evidence is notoriously good for surviving due to the very hot, dry conditions, I would expect some evidence of the forty year wonderings of 600,000 people!

Many records survive from ancient Egypt, so I would also expect some record of 6000,000 Israelites leaving Egypt, or some evidence of them ever having been there in the first place. But there is none, absolute sweet FA. It's been estimated that this would have been 20-25% of the population of ancient Egypt at the time, surely you would expect some record of their presence in Egypt.

But back to archaeology, it's shown that the Exodus story is a total fabrication without historical basis. Excavations at Jericho have shown that during the Early Iron Age (1200 - 1000 BCE), the city had been largely deserted and in a state of ruin for some 300 years. More importantly, no city walls had been present at this time, and the fall of the walls of Jericho is one of the most famous parts of the biblical story of the conquest of Canaan. The same is true of Ai, which the Israelites also conquered in the biblical account. This settlement wasn't occupied during the Late Bronze Age (1500-1200 BCE), and had been deserted for more than 1000 years at the time of the supposed conquest of Canaan.

We are also told of the Israelites' stay in Pithom, but the town was destroyed in the Middle Bronze Age (2000-1600 BCE), only to be reoccupied at the beginning of the 6th Century BCE. The Israelites also spent 'a long time' at Kadesh, yet excavations have shown that the site was first occupied in the 10th Century BCE.

Plus Egypt controlled the Levant in the supposed time of the Exodus and conquest of Canaan, but the writers of the Exodus are clearly unaware of this fact. Why? Because the story was created centuries later.

On top of this, the earliest known fragments of the Exodus story are in the Dead Sea scrolls, dating to the first century BCE. It's generally considered to have been written sometime around the seventh century BCE, some 900 years after the dates you're talking about.

The Book of Daniel clearly isn't a historical book, it was most probably written some 400 years after Belshazaar lived! The fact that some stories contain the names of historical figures doesn't mean that the stories themselves are historically accurate.

Daniel was written about 536 B.C.E. Belshazzar's rule ended on the night of October 5, 539 B.C.E. (Gregorian calendar / October 11 Julian calendar)

That's not the generally accepted view, which dates it to the second century BCE. We'll just have to differ on the date of the book's composition. You might want to check out the generally accepted dates for when the Old Testament was most probably written here;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dating_the_Bible#Torah

As for Solomon, the Bible claims that he had a mighty empire that stretched from the Euphrates to Egypt, whereas archaeology has shown this wasn't the case, and his mighty capital at Jerusalem was probably just a small town. There's also no archaeological evidence for Solomon's temple, and archaeology suggests the Jews weren't even monotheistic in the time of Solomon.

I'm just curious, could you demonstrate how archaeology has shown these things?

You're probably not going to like what's written in it, but I'd advise you to buy and read a copy of 'The Bible Unearthed' for starters;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_Unearthed

Then you might start to realise just how much the archaeological evidence contradicts the myths in the Bible.

As for the Jews being monotheistic, there's archaeological evidence showing they were still polytheistic as late as the sixth century BCE, and possibly as late as the second century BCE.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asherah#In_Israel_and_Judah