Criterion to Examine Various Religious Narratives

Most interesting argument for the veracity of the Torah by a Jewish fellow who has studied the major religions of the world and applies a very interesting criterion to the various narratives.

His lecture can be found at the following.

http://www.simpletoremember.com/articles/a/proof-torah-true/

“A Letter to a Skeptic”

“A Letter to a Skeptic”

(It is not often that I post two times in a day but as I read the following from a Facebook interchange, I thought it well to go ahead and post it.)

Again XXXX, I agree that there were excesses and reprehensible things done in the name of Christ and in that respect philosophic Christianity does not differ in large part from other movements who've impressed their will through violence, coercion, and manipulation.  However, if you give an honest reading to history, you find that these were cases of institutional Christianity far different from the born again, heart changing Christianity that Jesus taught.

The reality of Jesus is that He changes the hearts and lives of those who give themselves to Him. Those people do not do the things of which you speak. You see, in the vast majority of cases those things were done out of selfishness and for political purposes. The real deal Christian lives on a much different level.

Indeed it is the real deal Christians who have sacrificed and given not taken. It is the genuine article that has gone where no one would go (to serve and care for the dying during the black plagues), give beyond one's capacity to give to the needy, provide for the betterment of children (the first education of factory children was by real deal Christians), going to primitive tribes in order to give them a written language and thus access to written information, and so much more.

However as someone observed, "The atheist is better at smelling rotten eggs than laying good ones." The reality is that all you can do is disparage Christians based upon the excesses, however, if you gave history a fair reading (not some revisionist view) you would see that it is the genuine Christian that has done far more good than any of the extreme examples of egregiousness that you cite.

However, I cannot change what you choose to believe. Those are choices you make and the sad part is that there is always a consequence to what one believes. Believe and build on a foundation of truth and one derives one kind of outcome. Believe and build on a foundation of false information and one derives another kind of outcome.

Time is the test and true Christianity has been tested and has stood the test of time. The only way that one can disparage such veracity and validity is to focus upon the exceptions and not the realities of what coming to faith in Jesus Christ has done through the centuries.

XXXX, the reason that Christians have challenged your thinking is that even though we’ve never seen you, each of us in our own way cares about you. We are not here to harass you or degrade you. We are here to as accurately as possible share Jesus Christ with you with the hope that you find the genuine real deal truth about Him.  To decide upon Jesus based upon misinformation and the view of the cynical skeptic is to make a less than informed decision about Him.

Sincerely,

Alvie

“Be Consistent in Your Criticism”

“Be Consistent in Your Criticism”

Here is a question to ponder!

Ever notice that those who embrace all roads leading to God conveniently find fault with Christianity and yet explain away the practices even extreme practices of other faiths?

For example there are those who refer to Hizb’allah,  Hamas, the Taliban and Al-Qaida as deviant excesses of Islam, and yet generalize that all Catholics are bad because of the pedophilia of a few priests.  Another example is the notion that all television ministries care about is money because of the fundraising of a few in the media.  Those same people make no such criticism of PBS stations when they seek to raise funds.

Here is another one.  What about those who would argue that if Islam is your religion then things such as Sharia Law and Jihad are acceptable and yet point to those who oppose abortion on religious grounds as extremists and fanatics? 

Then there is this one?  There are those who propose that Sharia and Jihad are the exception to what Islam teaches while at the same time pointing out that mere witnessing about one’s faith in Christ Jesus is imposition one’s faith on another.  Then there are those who characterize Christians by the Crusades and conveniently forget that with brief exception, they were largely in response to the Muslim Crusades.[1] 

Why do you suppose this is so?  What is so objectionable in the Christian faith that critics think it their duty to distort the behavior of a few and then label the many with that distortion?  Why is a religion that has done so much good been so denigrated?  One would do well to consider that question.

I for one would ask those who verbalize these inconsistencies to be a little more consistent in your treatment of all religions.  All have their excesses, all have their deviants, all have problems.  The only exception is the brand of Christianity that is very basic and has taken seriously the command of Jesus Christ to come (away from your previous life) and follow (and keep following) Him.  The reason this is so is that all other forms of religion to include some other forms of Christianity have a high component of the human “self” which is as they say “fallible.”  More about that in another post.

So here is the deal. When you choose to defame Christianity and lump those who follow Jesus into your defamation just remember this one thing.  It is where Christianity and those who take seriously the Scriptures have gone and served, often at great personal loss, that there is a decided difference in quality of life, care for the weak and the infirmed, and other advances of man.  Think about it.  Where in this world do you find the quality of life that is present in cultures that have been influenced by Christianity?

---

[1] Truth be told millions and millions were killed in the Muslim Crusades while fewer than 100,000 were killed in the Christian Crusades and in that number there were those judge by Rome as being heretical Christian sects.

Christianity – Is it a “Knock off” of Other Religions?

The Assumption

Among some critics of Christianity is the notion reflected in the following statement.  “Mithraism is but the most striking example of the appearance of these myths and ceremonies prior to the advent of Christianity. They appear—in more scattered form—in many other pre-Christian religions.”

Statement found in pamphlet referenced below in Background Section

To begin with a question or two is in order.  Is there another religion besides Christianity that has been charged with importing its ideas and doctrines of from another religion?  Is there another that has been the object of such criticism?   The only other religion with which Christianity has such a relationship is Judaism.

A little research will reveal that the religion of Mithras found its origin in ancient Persia.  That being said, it occupied a minor position and thus though considered to be the god of light and wisdom it was largely unknown until popularized some years later. 

The assumption that what can be known of early Mithraism leads one directly to the prophecies about the coming Christ and therefore the Christ has no legitimate foundation except in the thinking of those who seek to criticize and discredit Christianity. 

Consider the following.

One insurmountable difficulty confronts the student of the Mithraic mysteries. For the Eastern form of Mithraism practically nothing except documentary evidence exists, whereas the Mithras of the Roman world is known to us almost exclusively from non-literary sources. That brilliant scholar, Franz Cumont, who died in 1947, has neatly summed up the position in his Die Mysterien des Mithra: 'It is,' he writes, 'as if it were only possible to study Christianity through the Old Testament and the mediaeval cathedrals.' Because of this great gap, the story of Mithras is bound to be incomplete and distorted, and those who wish to read it must wait for and assimilate the fresh discoveries which are made year by year.

Quote available at http://www.farvardyn.com/mithras.php

However, even if one calls into question this quotation, there are still serious problems with the idea of this religion giving rise to Christianity and the beliefs thereof.  A simple but honest review of the Jewish Scriptures (the Old Testament) and the dating thereof will lead to a much different conclusion.

At question are the dates of the prophecies of the coming Christ.  Such calls into question the whole presupposition necessary for the opening statement to be true.

Dating Backgrounds

The Persian Empire came to power sometime around 538 BC and would remain in power for about 200 years until conquered by Greece in 331 BC.  Then of course Rome conquered Greece in 323 BC.  The territories involved extended east to include the former Persian Empire.  The belief in Mithras was imported by Rome it occupied little importance in the religious landscape until it suddenly appeared in the 2^nd Century AD. 

Information found at http://www.religionfacts.com/greco-roman/sects/mithraism.htm

The article continues as follows.

The time period in which Mithraism flourished is better known, thanks to the archaeological evidence. The cult of Mithras appears suddenly in the 2nd century AD - hundreds of inscriptions begin appearing after 136 AD. It then died out with the rest of Greco-Roman paganism after the conversion of Constantine in the 4th century. Its sudden emergence in the Roman world has not been explained. According to the Encyclopaedia Britannica,

The most plausible hypothesis seems to be that Roman Mithraism was practically a new creation, wrought by a religious genius who may have lived as late as c. AD 100 and who gave the old traditional Persian ceremonies a new Platonic interpretation that enabled Mithraism to become acceptable to the Roman world.

Ibid

To suggest that Mithraism is the foundation of Christianity is to play fast and loose with the dates of both religions.  Even if one accepts the premise based upon an early dating of Mithras even that does not line up with the prophecies of the coming Christ.  In other words, the prophecies predate the Persian Empire. 

Messianic Prophecies Don’t Line Up With Assumption

Reference is now made to the dating of many of those prophecies.

Moses:  The earliest prophecies of what would turn out to be the Christ are found in the writing of Moses.  His writings (Genesis through Deuteronomy) are dated some 900 years before the Persian Empire around 1450 BC. 

The Psalms:  Another place in the Old Testament that a number of prophecies are found is in the collection of Psalms one of which was written by Moses, others by King David and his contemporaries, and still others later.  Generally it is believed that the Psalms were collected sometime in the 10^th Century BC.  That would place those prophecies some 500 years before the Persian Empire.

Isaiah:  Perhaps the most referenced book of the Bible when it comes of prophecies of the coming Messiah is that of Isaiah.  Written sometime around 700 BC, it too predates the Persian Empire by as much as 200 years.

There would be others who wrote of the coming Messiah.  The prophet Micah was a contemporary of Isaiah and wrote in the same time period.  Zechariah wrote just after the Persian Empire came to power, however, there is no evidence that he used source material and in fact the purist and exclusive mind set of the Jewish people would have precluded his doing so.

Discounting the Supernatural

The Bible is clear that there are certain parts of man which are “hard wired” into his believing int here being something beyond himself and beyond the material world.  For example the Bible speaks of eternity being in the heart of man (Ecclesiastes 3:11).  As well the Apostle Paul writes to the Roman Christians that there are two witnesses to there being God, one is a witness in the inner being of man and the other is seen in Creation. 

When one factors in that 83% of the world’s population believe that there is some form of supernatural, just on sheer evidence alone one must allow for the possibility of Christianity being valid.  However, those who refuse to accept there being a supernatural element to life as we know it must work hard to support their position.

Background

To see the list of subjects to be discussed in this series see my blog (Christianity – Is it a Faith Driven by Fear? http://alviesthots.blogspot.com/2012/11/christianity-is-it-faith-driven-by-fear.html).  Contained within that blog is a reference, 20 Reasons to Abandon Christianity and in that reference is a list which is the springboard from which this subject has been discussed.