Not so serious anymore

[John317]

Thanks John for your answers. When you go to sleep, i ve just come out of bad because i live on the other side of the planet. Do you have a theological background? Anyway thank you also for your prayers.

As I recall, you're "down under," right? So if that's true, it is 7: 48 PM Wednesday in Southern California and where you are, it's about noon Thursday.

I struggled for over 30 years with sexual addictions. Actually that is not exactly true. For most of those years, I just gave up and drifted with those things. I didn't believe it could be helped, and frankly, most of that time, I didn't want to stop. I wanted God and Christ, but I didn't want to give up certain parts of my life. It took me from about 1967 to 2004 to get to the point where I decided to allow Christ to take over my entire life. I had to finally reach the decision where it was all Christ or nothing.

The one great advantage I had is that I had grown up in a home where my parents were truly dedicated, consistent, faithful Christians. We had had family worship twice a day and I had wonderful memories of Sabbath. If it hadn't been for those things, I am sure I would never have returned to Christ. Those influences and memories were always there. I rebelled against it because I wanted to experience the life of the world. So when people would talk about Christianity as if everyone is phony and it's all a lie, I knew personally that they were wrong, because I saw and experienced genuine Christianity in my home.

But yes, I studied religion and theology at both private and public universities.

[cardw]

Quote:

There is pretty good evidence, actually, the Christian missionaries in the first and second century influenced the Hindu religion and particularly the name and character of the god Krishna.

It is far more likely that the influence was the other way around since Krisna was the model for several Greek gods. And Greeks were the primary authors of the New Testament.

In the Chandogya Upanishad written before 500 B.C. Krisna is not treated as a deity, but is said to have learned from the sage Ghora a knowledge from which he never thirsted again. Jesus claimed to be able to give knowledge from which we would never thirst again.

"Hindus believe that Krishna was the eighth "avatar", or incarnation, of the god Vishnu - one of the Hindu deities in the Hindu trinity. Hindu scriptures state that Krishna "appeared in all the fullness of his power and glory." Krishna was born sometime between 900 and 1200 B.C. and his religious teachings can be found in the Bhagavad-Gita, one of the sacred texts in Hinduism. The karmic similarities between Jesus and the Hindu messiah named Krishna(1200 B.C.) are many. There over one hundred similarities between the Hindu and Christian saviors which could easily fill a volume. Some of these similarities are apocryphal, which means their source comes from the extra-canonical scriptures of Hinduism."

[Taylor]

There are many similarities in the Muslim Faith, and even people like the Amish with what Adventism teaches. I have known Catholic priests that have found the same truths that SDA's teach and they had never heard of SDA's before. It just points to one simple fact that God is leading people with our without someone to wittness to them. The truths are in God's word and are there for anyone who is seeking after God. Some will find all the truths, some will find part of them and then continue to grow...the pace is up to God but God is awsome because he cares about people in all churches and faiths.

[Woody]

Good Point Taylor.

Look at the Amish ... they don't do all the things they do to 'earn' salvation. They do these things to protect themselves from going the way of the world. It is kind of like how I religiously guard the Sabbath. I don't do it to earn salvation. I do it to keep myself on the straight and narrow way. To make sure I can be blessed the fullest.

I am not aware of the Muslim faith ... but I think that God is working through his Holy Spirit to reach all and He will. It just may not be the picture that we as SDAs might want. They will not all be SDAs.

[John317]

Quote:

There is pretty good evidence, actually, the Christian missionaries in the first and second century influenced the Hindu religion and particularly the name and character of the god Krishna.

It is far more likely that the influence was the other way around since Krisna was the model for several Greek gods. And Greeks were the primary authors of the New Testament.

In the Chandogya Upanishad written before 500 B.C. Krisna is not treated as a deity, but is said to have learned from the sage Ghora a knowledge from which he never thirsted again. Jesus claimed to be able to give knowledge from which we would never thirst again...

THE NEW REVOLUTION IN HINDUISM

Such was India five hundred years after Darnel when the Church of the East entered that unhappy land. Of all the difficult situations Christianity ever faced in the Orient, the one in India was without rival. Fearless in the strength of the Holy Spirit, apostolic fervor at once challenged hidebound heathenism. Now unified under the organization completed by Papas, the church went forth to conquer for Christ. God gave wonderful success.

With the sickle of truth the witnesses for Jesus gleaned golden grain for the heavenly garner. Year after year, decade after decade, Christianity revealed itself as a conquering force in India.

Then an amazing revolution occurred. The Brahmans awoke with a start.

They realized that new truths were wrenching their power from them.

They doubtless reasoned thus, “Why sit we here as fools? Have we not seen the church at Rome in the west build up a successful rival to the New Testament church? Let us outrun both Rome and the simpler bodies of Christianity. Let us fabricate such a dazzling scheme of imitation that all other religions, even our own former teaching, will be completely eclipsed.” Then about 600 they invented the Krishna legend, and in support of it they falsified their chronology.

The power of the gospel to challenge error is revealed in the stirring among the Hindu leaders. The pagan priests were aware that it meant the end of their power unless they fabricated new weapons. Success depended upon their ability to imitate. They must make the same powerful appeals to the human emotions which for the first time had been brought to the world through Jesus Christ. They must revamp their religious duties and copy or counterfeit the services of the true church.

To build a defense against the gospel, they were obliged to do three things.

First, they must invent a god of their own who entered a human body.

This could compete with the story of the birth of Jesus in the flesh, which was winning hearts everywhere. Secondly, they must give this counterfeit Messiah a name similar to Christ, with similar events of His life and parallel teachings. Thirdly, they must arrange their chronology with Hindu astronomy to throw the date of this fabricated incarnation centuries previous to the birth of Jesus in order to make Christianity appear to have been copied from Hinduism. New literature was provided to give success to the venture.

The deity they chose to incarnate was Krishna, a name much like that of Christ. Books written by pagans, previous to the coming of Christianity, had told of the descents of the gods among men. These, however, had been simply the manifestation of some part of some attribute of the divinity.

The new doctrine of incarnation which now sprang up produced a complete round of literature and theology concerning the wondrous birth of Vishnu, the supreme deity, who came in human flesh under the name “Krishna.” 58 “He descended in all the fullness of the godhead, so much so that Vishnu is sometimes confounded with Brahma, the latter becoming incarnate in Krishna as ‘the very supreme Brahma.’” 59 Many epics were written to glorify the exploits of this god who had descended to share the joys and sorrows of humanity. In the hearts of millions, Krishna has come to occupy the place of Vishnu himself. Even as Christians direct their prayers to Christ instead of God, so Hindus may direct their prayers to Krishna rather than to Vishnu, the supreme deity.

Truth Triumphant, B. G. Wilkinson

Continued on following post:

[John317]

Great credit is due to John Bentley who, in 1825, detected this fraud of the Brahmans after it had been accepted for twelve hundred years. The similarity between the names of Christ and Krishna had long been noticed.

Writers had listed the many agreements between the events of Christ’s birth and life and those of Krishna. 60 When later translations of Hindu literature were published, thinkers were puzzled over the many startling similarities between the teachings of the two religions. The priests of India who claimed that the incarnation of Krishna was six hundred years before Christ, loved to boast that the New Testament was built out of the Hindu epics. Bentley solved the mystery. He obtained from the Brahmans the horoscope of Krishna, who, they said, was born at midnight of March 25, and also the positions of the sun, the moon, and the five planets among the heavenly constellations. This keen Englishman, skilled in the mathematics of astronomy, proved conclusively that the earliest date which could be claimed for the birth of Krishna was August 7, A.D. 600. 61 Subsequent writers on Hinduism have felt Bentley’s findings worthy of consideration.

The following interesting details concerning Krishna are given by M’Clintock and Strong:

Krishnaism, with all its imperfections, may be accounted as a necessary and extreme revolt of the human heart against the unsatisfying vagaries of the godless philosophy into which Brahmanism and Buddhism had alike degenerated. The speculations of the six schools of philosophy, as enumerated by native writers, served only to bewilder the mind until the word maya, “illusion,” was evolved as the exponent of all that belongs to the life to come. Man’s nature asks for light upon the perplexed questions of mortal existence, but at the same time demands that which is of more moment, an anchorage for the soul in the near and tangible....

On the other hand, the Puranas disclose with regard to Krishna a human life, when considered from the most favorable standpoint, discreditable to the name and nature of man. It is a tissue of puerilities and licentiousness. The miraculous deeds of Krishna were rarely for an object commensurate with the idea of a divine interposition. His associations as a cowherd (gopala) with the gopis [females] — in which capacity he is most popular as an object of adoration — are no better than the amours of classic mythology.” At the time the Brahmans invented the Krishna story there was no opposing power in India strong enough to prevent them from creating the fraud. The Dark Ages were settling down on Europe. In the west there was neither enough interest nor ability to unmask the deception. It is a great tribute to the splendid missionary activity displayed by the Church of the East that Hinduism, fearful of losing its power, was driven to create a counterfeit of Christ and His gospel. It proves that the evangelical church over which Papas had been elected in 285 had become a force to be reckoned with by 600.

Speaking of Cosmas, the celebrated Nestorian traveler and preacher, a wellknown Oriental writer, using the word “monk” in its original meaning of pastor, indicates the vast extent of the Church of the East in 538:

Here we will again pause a moment to consider the description given by Cosmas (who before he became a monk was an Alexandrian merchant and navigated the Mediterranean, Red Sea, Persian Gulf, and also visited India and Ceylon) of the vast extent of AN ORIENTAL CHRISTIANITY at the very date, A.D. 535, of the arrival of the Mahayana in Japan. He declares that churches with a complete liturgy were then to be found in Ceylon, Malabar, Socotra, and N. W. India (apparently identical with the St. Thomas Christians) ministered to by bishops and priests sent from the Patriarch of Seleucia; also in Bactria and amongst the Huns; in Mesopotamia, Scythia, etc.” In the story of Papas we have seen the forces with which the Church of the East contended. Yet against all these powerful enemies the church under the organization begun in the days of Papas was triumphant. Each one of these counterfeit religions was obliged to adopt drastic measures to combat the inroads made by this church, a guardian of apostolic Christianity. God greatly blessed the Church of the East and preserved it for centuries until it had accomplished its mission.

Truth Triumphant, B. G. Wilkinson

[cardw]

Your use of B. G. Wilkerson as your source is dubious. He believed that Ellen White was inerrant, as well as the Bible. This would severely color his research in all of these areas. He also was a main supporter of the King James only, which is evidence of extremely poor scholarship since the King James is a highly biased translation.

You can find a brief biography here...

Benjamin G. Wilderson

Now I'm not a fan of Hinduism, nor of any organized religion and its true that Krisna has some more modern manifestations and just a Christianity would be influenced by Hinduism, so would Hinduism be influenced by Christianity.

They are both victims of the same types of myth building. I will illustrate in more detail in my next post.

[cardw]

Quote:

Great credit is due to John Bentley who, in 1825, detected this fraud of the Brahmans after it had been accepted for twelve hundred years. The similarity between the names of Christ and Krishna had long been noticed.

John Bentley's work was written mainly to refute the claim of ancient astrology by the hindu religious system. The fact is that the Hindu system was not influenced by Christianity, but by Babylonian and Greek astrological systems. They developed a number of advanced astrological techniques as well, but they were more recent than claimed by Hindu scholars.

Jesus was being blended with Greek philosophy, particularly neo platonic views. Jesus was also being blended with Greek astrological myths to give him credibility, much like the Hindu were doing by updating their systems of belief. To them it was not dishonest, but simply an advance in knowledge. They, as well as the Greeks, were familiar with the practice of consolidating various belief systems since they believed that they were all true. This was the rudimentary beginnings of a scientific method because the stars offered an opportunity to actually predict the future by predicting their position in the sky.

The reason Jesus was such an important name is that the name Jesus is actually Joshua. The word Jesus/Joshua was considered to be a magic healing word in pre-Christian practices. Intimations of this assertion are found in Mark 9:38 and Luke 9:49, which depict the complaints of the disciples that there are others casting out demons in the name of Jesus. Justin Martyr states that Joshua became able to perform miracles only after his name was changed to Yeshua. He was implying that it was the NAME of Jesus, rather than the "person" that could cast out demons.

There are a number of Dead Sea Scrolls that talk about Joshua as a savior to come in the last days. Joshua was very important to the Samaritans. Samaritans are treated very favorably in the gospels and their theology tended to down play the law. There are strong Samaritan theological influences in the Dead Sea Scrolls as evidenced by references to the Northern kingdom, emphasis on Moses and Joshua and critical writings about the Aaron priesthood. The Dead Sea Scrolls have an emphasis on salvation and less on the law because it was not Moses (Law) but Joshua (Savior) who brought the Jews into the promised land. It becomes apparent that there was a pre-Christian Jesus/Joshua sect which became the prototype for the gospel of Jesus.

Once these teaching became part of the Greek and Roman movements you have the Hellenization of this Jewish philosophy. This is where Greek astrology begins to become mixed into the story of a Jesus that may never have existed.

Here are the astrological connections to Jesus...

This particular passage from Tertullian, a revered Church father, is rather revealing on the attitudes that Christians had toward Sun worship. When addressing the accusation that Christians are Sun worshippers, he essentially uses the statement, "You say we worship the sun. So do you." Evidently sun worship was seen as superstitious by even the Pagans.

Tertullian goes on to say about the accusation that Christians are sun worshippers, "The idea no doubt has originated from our being know to turn to the east in prayer. But you, many of you, also under the pretence sometimes of worshipping the heavenly bodies, move your lips in the direction of the sunrise. In the same way...we devote Sunday to rejoicing, from a far different reason than Sun-worship..."

For centuries Christians bowed to the rising sun before entering churches. Despite Tertullian's protestations, in his writings called "On the Resserection of the Flesh" referred to Paul's comments at 1 Cor. 15:21 and compared the "glory of the sun" to that of Christ.

Quote:

In like manner does he take examples from the heavenly bodies: "There is one glory of the sun" (that is, of Christ), "and another glory of the moon" (that is, of the Church), "and another gory of the stars" (in other words, of the seed of Abraham).

Clement of Alexandria (150?-215? A.D.), an Orthodox church father refers to Christ as the "Sun of the Resurrection":

Quote:

And the Lord, with ceaseless assiduity, exhorts, terrifies, urges, rouses, admonishes; He awakes from the sleep of darkness, and raises up those who have wandered in error. "Awake" He says, "thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light" Christ, the SUN of the Resurrection, He "who was born before the morning star," and with His BEAMS bestows life.

Regarding the "Sun of Righteousness," Clement further says...

Quote:

For "the Sun of Righteousness," who drives His chariot over all, pervades equally all humanity, like "His Father, who makes His SUN to rise on all men," and distils on them the dew of the truth. He hath changed sunset into sunrise, and through the cross brought death to life...

Many previous sun gods such as Surya, Helios, Apollo, Mithra, and Krishna drove a four horsed chariot across the sky as a symbol of the Sun.

Clearly the early church was steeped in Pagan practices and myths. The philosophy of Jesus was certainly attractive because it freed people from a predestination by the gods. One could change their station in life and have equal access to salvation. But Christianity was simply a step in the evolution of religion, just like all other religions. And Christian advances would certainly be attractive other religious systems and they would freely adapt their myths to include those advances, believing that they must have been there all along, much like Christian apologists do today.

And finally here is a link that describes the story of Jesus as the astrological movement of the Sun throughout the year. The parallels are striking and fit many of the ancient Christian rituals of the Catholic church.

Jesus story as an Astrological Allegory for the Sun passing through the Zodiac

[John317]

Your use of B. G. Wilkerson as your source is dubious. He believed that Ellen White was inerrant, as well as the Bible. This would severely color his research in all of these areas. He also was a main supporter of the King James only, which is evidence of extremely poor scholarship since the King James is a highly biased translation.

You can find a brief biography here...

Benjamin G. Wilderson

Yes, he may be someone you disagree with on a number of issues, and this may cause you not to respect his scholarship, but I wouldn't let my differences with someone keep me from reading what they have to say on such an interesting topic as the one I've posted.

There are a lot of highly intelligent people who believe the Bible is inerrant, and there are also a lot of intelligent people who will only use the KJV. I don't agree with those views, but that doesn't mean I dismiss everything they say or look upon everything they say with suspicion.

The reason I posted parts of Wilkinson's book is that I thought you might be interested in reading what he had to say about Krishna. I think it's worth considering, at the very least.

[John317]

How can we say that with such certainty?

We know that there were early Christians as far back as the first century who made contact with Hindus in India.

It seems reasonable to suppose that the association may have had some influence, at least it is not unreasonable to think it could have.

[Guest truthseeker007]

Card W i believe that you have got the wrong starting point. Jesus warned us that before the second coming there would be many false Christs. Satan knew before Jesus was born that he would come and he probably knows more about Jesus then anybody else.

Furthermore, do you really believe that a despised sect in the first centuries came up with a masterplan to eventually in the next generations gain control, after first being heavily persecuted by the establishment. Do you really believe that in those old times, over many generations, Christianity was the product of a very intelligent plot?

You don t believe in God, therefore the things that you are telling us must be the only way you can explain Christianity. I kind of believe in God therefore i think the satan hypothesis explains it better.

[Lutz13]

Thank you all for your kindness. I am feeling terrible right now. It s like a thousand needles are stuck inside my head. I am so angry with God. Last night i couldn t sleep because i was so filled with anger. I prayed several times calling Jesus a liar, a murderer, a loser, etc. and much more even worse things. I took my bible and after every false promise i wrote down 'liar' etc. and that his father is an a..ole too. I didn t ask to be born. The number one reason why i don t want kids is because when i look back after all the sh,t i have been through, i don t want to do that to others. I think that would be totally selfish. I hate God and i hate Satan they are really the same. God is like satan and satan is like God. Only God is stronger and satan is the loser. To me it is mind-boggling how someone can trust God. God is a liar and i hate him. There is nothing special in the bible, i ll use those fairytales for toilet paper. I am so frustrated, i want to scream, i want to let God feel what he has done to me. Maybe i am going to hang myself on a cross to illustrate that mental pain surpasses the physical pain. JEsus is so extremely selfish. I need help, i am programmed to believe the fairytales of the bible. I need to get rid of em. i need help!

You sound like me a few months ago. I threw my bible across the room and let God know how I really felt. I told him he can't expect me to believe without evidence!! I had read an article about Moses being a fictional character who was created to start a nation. How God was a mythical character hell bent on destruction. It was very well written and my faith was small at the time of reading it. Needless to say the article pretty much destroyed what little faith I had.

The next day I logged into Netflix. I was surprised to see that the recommended movie for me to watch was the history of the bible. I clicked on it and began watching it. It was very interesting learning of the dead sea scrolls and a lot of other facts. Something really stuck out though, and it was louder than all the rest. The guy started talking about how over the years several rulers have tried to get rid of the bible. That obviously never worked. This is the part that was really loud and stuck with me. He basically said that tactics were changed. To stop Christianity, these people need to get people to not believe in it. So evolution comes into the picture. Satan is the master at lies. I totally fell right into it.

Interestingly enough I also learned that the evidence is all around us. The sun that feeds and warms our planet. The water we drink. The simple fact that we have eyes to see the world. Ears to hear what's around us. Tongues to taste, noses to smell. The mere fact that when I see a woman, I see a beauty. Why is that? Seems too crazy to think that these are all random.

My doubts were still not quenched though. I found a website that was a Godsend.

http://www.danielbibleprophecy.org/daniel11.html

When I finished reading chapter 11, I jumped out of my chair and started jumping around my room like a madman. I was so excited to know that there is a God. All doubts were gone. Not a moment goes by now that I think God doesn't exist.

I've been looking into something else lately. Most people have a hard time with this, and refuse to believe it. They try and bring God down to their own level. God has never destroyed anything in this world. Not once has he killed anyone. He didn't destroy Sodom and Gomorrah. It was Satan, yet God takes the blame for it. He says I did it. Kind of like when Saul killed himself. Later God said that He slew Saul! People think God's wrath is full of destruction. No, His wrath is giving people up to their own desires. In other words, people go into self destruct mode. They no longer have their conscience telling them right from wrong.

So friend. Yes God does love you. If he's not answering you, keep at it. The answers are in His Word, just be calm, and be patient. I'll pray for you as well. Good luck, hope to see you in heaven brother.

[melvin mccarty]

Way back up near the top of page 4 in this thread there is a statement that Eve was not really naked which contradicts a plain statement of scripture. Were Adam and Eve really naked or not? I recall paintings with a stategically placed bush but I dont remember any pictures with a covering of "light". mel

[cardw]

Quote:

Yes, he may be someone you disagree with on a number of issues, and this may cause you not to respect his scholarship, but I wouldn't let my differences with someone keep me from reading what they have to say on such an interesting topic as the one I've posted.

I not only read what he had to say, but the references he quoted to make sure he was not selectively reading, which he was. When someone accepts the KJV only, they are practicing selective reading. This is an issue of facts and accuracy, not personal dislike on my part.

Quote:

The reason I posted parts of Wilkinson's book is that I thought you might be interested in reading what he had to say about Krishna. I think it's worth considering, at the very least.

I did consider it, but you will note that his reference, while exactly right on the issue of Hindu astrology being more contemporary than Hindu claims, was not right on the influence of Christianity on Hinduism. The Christ/hero sources for both Hindu and Christian myths existed before the Christian era. They were both constructing Christ/Krisna myths, because the later Christian myth is based on the Sun god blended with messianic movements of the time.

Granted there could be contemporary adaption, but the idea that there was a monolithic Hindu religion is simply not true. India has so many cults that one loses count very quickly. The monolithic view was simply imposed by the English scholars so they could organize a critique. So, any conclusion that Hinduism was influenced by Christianity in any large way would be a huge exaggeration.

[cardw]

[cardw]

Card W i believe that you have got the wrong starting point. Jesus warned us that before the second coming there would be many false Christs. Satan knew before Jesus was born that he would come and he probably knows more about Jesus then anybody else.

Furthermore, do you really believe that a despised sect in the first centuries came up with a masterplan to eventually in the next generations gain control, after first being heavily persecuted by the establishment. Do you really believe that in those old times, over many generations, Christianity was the product of a very intelligent plot?

You don t believe in God, therefore the things that you are telling us must be the only way you can explain Christianity. I kind of believe in God therefore i think the satan hypothesis explains it better.

The starting point for modern Christianity is the Roman Empire. Once Christianity became the state religion, it became formed. It was not formed before that, but was a large collection of various mystical messianic religions.

The most likely explanation is that religion goes through an evolutionary process. Early man would look up into the sky and begin to make up myths about these great mysteries and then when agricultural societies began to form, the stars and the sun could be used to predict the seasonal cycles and these cultures began to form stories about the obvious celestial bodies in the sky, such as the sun, the moon, and the stars.

Christianity simply absorbed the symbols and rituals of previous religions. At one time the Greeks took their gods as seriously as Christians take Jesus. But, as one culture conquers another, they either destroy the previous gods or absorb them. Rome simply absorbed Messianic religion into its pagan mythology until its source was forgotten by the Middle ages.

[John317]

Quote:

Yes, he may be someone you disagree with on a number of issues, and this may cause you not to respect his scholarship, but I wouldn't let my differences with someone keep me from reading what they have to say on such an interesting topic as the one I've posted.

I not only read what he had to say, but the references he quoted to make sure he was not selectively reading, which he was. When someone accepts the KJV only, they are practicing selective reading. This is an issue of facts and accuracy, not personal dislike on my part.

Having studied the manuscripts of the NT and compared the KJV closely with other translations, I'm convinced that the differences don't matter in any fundamental way. The NASB and KJV basically teach the same thing. Not much difference doctrinally. There are hundreds of variants, but they don't amount to much. There are no essential doctrines changed as a result of the variants.

If you know of one, please let me know what it is.

Whether someone insists only on the KJV or not doesn't mean much in terms of what the Bible teaches. I am fine with the Majority Text or the Critical Text or the Textus Receptus.

SDA beliefs can easily be taught from any of those three texts. It's the same message of God's love and Christ's life and sacrifice for us.

[cardw]

Quote:

Having studied the manuscripts of the NT and compared the KJV closely with other translations, I'm convinced that the differences don't matter in any fundamental way. The NASB and KJV basically teach the same thing. Not much difference doctrinally. There are hundreds of variants, but they don't amount to much. There are no essential doctrines changed as a result of the variants.

Well the whole enterprise of putting the bible together was to make "official" the most powerful sect of Christianity within Rome, "true" Christianity. The issue with the King James was that the translators made a rule that if any doubt about how something should be translated should favor a non orthodox doctrine, then the translation would favor the orthodox position. This effectively removed any gnostic views of Jesus. So from certain perspectives there are considerable differences between translations.

The fact that this had to be done indicates that there were forceful suppressions of less powerful sects of Christianity. Christians also, in the destruction of the Library at Alexandria and systematic book destruction, essentially removed most of the evidence of its true origin allowing later revisions to the history to take precedence.

Christian history, much like other triumphal histories, takes great liberties in accuracy to make sure that Christianity looks like a pure succession of ideas through some Divine providence. The problem is that Christians largely ignore this triumphal nature and are very critical of other competing mythologies that are essentially doing the same thing. In fact Christians continue to write triumphal "histories" and that is why most scholars don't really take them that seriously.

One simply has to look at the general public in this election to realize that most people are easily duped and their thinking and reasoning skills are very poor. The majority are often wrong. Unfortunately the religious majority are trying to revise history and use the argument of faith to justify the transformation of myth to fact. This includes calling the United States a Christian nation and the belief that the Bible is a Divine document and is inerrantly true.

[John317]

Quote:

Having studied the manuscripts of the NT and compared the KJV closely with other translations, I'm convinced that the differences don't matter in any fundamental way. The NASB and KJV basically teach the same thing. Not much difference doctrinally. There are hundreds of variants, but they don't amount to much. There are no essential doctrines changed as a result of the variants.

Well the whole enterprise of putting the bible together was to make "official" the most powerful sect of Christianity within Rome, "true" Christianity. The issue with the King James was that the translators made a rule that if any doubt about how something should be translated should favor a non orthodox doctrine, then the translation would favor the orthodox position. This effectively removed any gnostic views of Jesus. So from certain perspectives there are considerable differences between translations.

Can you give some specific examples in the King James Version?

What gnostic views of Jesus were removed? Do you find more gnostic views in the Critical Text than in the Received Text?

I'd like to know what these are if you are aware them.

Please also give examples of the "considerable differences between translations" which are due to an underlying text and which are significant doctrinally. This is an area in which I have great interest, so I would appreciate any information or insights you may have on it.

[John317]

I would go further and say that the majority have almost always been wrong.

It is the majority who have no faith in God or in the Bible as the word of God.

[John317]

The fact that this had to be done indicates that there were forceful suppressions of less powerful sects of Christianity. Christians also, in the destruction of the Library at Alexandria and systematic book destruction, essentially removed most of the evidence of its true origin allowing later revisions to the history to take precedence.

What is the worst, "forceful suppression" you know of?

What evidence do you have that Christians were responsible for the destruction of the Library at Alexandria?

You seem to be claiming that Christians were intentionally and deliberately lying or making up lies about fundamental truths regarding the origin of Christianity. Is this what you are saying?

How does this harmonize with the fact that hundreds of thousands of them were willing to die for what they believed? Would you say that leaders such as Peter and Paul and John were dishonest and made up lies?

Quote:

Christian history, much like other triumphal histories, takes great liberties in accuracy to make sure that Christianity looks like a pure succession of ideas through some Divine providence.

In the classes in the history of the Christian church that I've taken, I haven't found what you say to be true. There is no effort to hide truth. I want truth. I'm not interested in believing something false.

I don't know what history books you're referring to, but I read everything, whether it supports Christianity or not. Some of my favorite writers were anti-Christian, such as Gibbons, Marx, Engels, Trotsky, Nietzsche, and Bertrand Russell. The histories I read show a great deal of debate and sometimes even violence to arrive at what various Christian groups believe is truth. There may be some who attempt to hide these things, but not all do.

For instance, the doctrine of the Trinity was at the center of quite a bit of violence at times.

But is that in itself evidence or proof that it is false?

Quote:

Unfortunately the religious majority are trying to revise history and use the argument of faith to justify the transformation of myth to fact. This includes calling the United States a Christian nation and the belief that the Bible is a Divine document and is inerrantly true.

"Religious majority"? I wouldn't call it that.

The fundamental religious belief in the United States during its formative years was certainly Christian. That means that most people had some knowledge of Christianity and the Bible, and believed in it to one extent or another.

Does that mean the United States is NOW a Christian nation? No. I don't believe we are a Christian nation now. We were never officially a Christian nation. Our first three presidents were deists, although they got their values and ideals from Christianity. All three were great admirers of Jesus Christ.

Is the Bible "inerrantly" true or a Divine document? I have no question the Bible is the word of God-- inspired by God-- but I don't think it is inerrant. It was written by men who were inspired by God. That means God gave them dreams and visions and sent the Holy Spirit to help them write, but I believe that inspiration affected their thoughts. I don't believe the Bible was dictated by God.

[Lineman]

I have decided to let God do the work. All my efforts were fruitless. I will pray and try to do the right stuff, no matter how many times i fall and stumble, i ll get up and struggle along until i gave my last breath.

[Guest truthseeker007]

Thanks Dan for your concerns. I really appreciate your worries. You know i ve got a lot of pain and troubles to consume in my mind. Being taught evolution at school while i grew up a Christan was terrible, not to forget the bullies, occultism, drugs, Alcoholism, fightings etc. etc. Right now i feel like staying alive is hard enough. That s why i really appreciate your prayers. I started to realise something. How come a person can become extremely addicted to porn? I believe that in my subconcoious mind there is so many pains stored that cause depressions and the only way i am able to canalise this stuff is porn in its most disgusting forms. However, these last days my addiction has disappeard and i am starting to see things more clearly now. I believe that this is the result of your prayers so i hope you won t stop praying for me. I admit that i do way too less for my fellow people and for God, but at least i am alert about what s happening in the world. Once all hell breaks loose, i know exactly what to do. Untill that time i have to keep study God s plan and struggle with these attacks on my mind. Something is constantly playing bad memories like a casette inside my head, making me angry.

Anyway thanks for your help

[Lineman]

Hi TS,

Something is constantly playing bad memories like a casette inside my head, making me angry.

[John317]

I used to have that problem too, believe it or not. Then a couple of things happened. One, I was shown that if I continued on the course I was on I would never make it to heaven...

Could you explain briefly why you believe this?

There are some on the Forum who believe that a person can be saved while living in sin and that since we are saved by Christ's righteousness, it doesn't matter what we do as long as we "know" Jesus.