Rev Mike wrote:
all your points about who killed who, you forget the why. Stalin believed communism was the only way to follow gods law.
Really? He believed that?
"You know, they are fooling us, there is no God... all this talk about God is sheer nonsense." -
Joseph Stalin, Landmarks in the Life of Stalin Rev Mike wrote:you claim to know so much about the history of christianity then tell me the story of Horus.
Horus? There are probably a dozen others throughout the world's cultures: Attis, Bacchus, Krishna, Mithra, Zoroaster
There are others.
Similarly, the world also holds other myths in common, such as The Great Flood, which is found in even more cultures worldwide than is the child god myths.
Let's start backwards though...
The Great Flood:
This is a common myth found in a great many cultures throughout the world. Let's start with this question: "Would a common myth be more likely to be evidence FOR something's historicity or AGAINST?" I would say that BOTH sides have an argument. On the "FOR" side, when there are many multiple accounts of a similar event it could tend to lend credibility to such a claim, just as we would put more weight on MANY witnesses seeing a certain thing, as opposed to ONE person claiming they saw a certain thing. On the "AGAINST" side, one could argue that a story is told within one culture, and repeated in other cultures as trade and communications between these cultures advanced, and over time perhaps, the new cultures ADOPT the story and localize it by using names and locations common to their own roots.
BOTH are plausible. But in the case of the Great Flood, many of these stories are so old, and often some of these cultures had no contact with one another, so that it could be more plausible, that they are based on some historical event. Geology does not negate this possiblity, as excessive flooding of major regions of the ancuent world have been shown to have occured, and there are several theories with scientific support to show that this may have occured more than a few times, with one of the most recent proposals being a catastrophic deluge about 5600 BCE where the Mediterranean Sea flooded into the Black Sea. There is another involving the possibility that a comet, thousands of years ago, caused a massive tidal wave.
Personally, I have wondered whether these stories have more to do with ancient people's finding seashells and fossils of fish on mountain tops, and without an understanding of plate techtonics and that mountains can literally rise out of the sea, they would naturally assume that these seemingly UNMOVEABLE mountains had been covered in water, while in their current positions, requiring of course, a HUGE amount of water, A GREAT FLOOD, to accomplish the task. I tend to believe that my own postulation (not that I was the first to consider this of course) is the most likely.
It is quite clear that some of the oldest stories in the Bible, such as the Great Flood, are myth based. The Bible's explanation of a Rainbow, being the most obvious evidence. With modern science, there is no mystery of how rainbows are formed. God did not change the laws of physics, and create the phenomena of rainbows at some mid-point of humans inhabitting the Earth, but on the contrary, water acting as a prism for sunlight, separating the bands into their distinct colors, has been around, since water and sunlight have. Well before humans populated the planet.
I suspect that the story of Noah is an extension of this myth, because when ancient people's decided that seashells and fish fossils on a mountain top were proof that the entire world must have been under water, then this would lead to the question: "Well, how is it that there are animals and people all around now then? Wouldn't they all have perished, except for the sea dwelling creatires?" And the answer that would make the most sense would be that, if someone or some animals too, were on a boat, a very big boat, then they may have been spared this disaster. The next question: "What boat? Why would they have been spared and no one else?" And the answer would be something that fit them being deserving of such fortune. Namely, a god deciding that they were worth saving, along with enough pairs of animals to procreate the Earth again.
Having said all that.
I don't discount the possibility that there was a historical Noah either. Some reserachers are so possitive that the Ark was discovered and even photographed on a mountain in Eastern Turkey that they have spent decades trying to obtain entry there to be allowed to excavate it.
It would be thrilling if true, but I highly doubt it.
But it could be true. There is no real evidence for or against this possibility.
But personally, I don't have a problem with historical myths being a part of the Bible, any more than I have a problem with POETRY having a place in it. Some of the poetry of the Bible, the Song of Solomon especially, seems to have NOTHING to do with religious education or moral dogma. It is included likely, because it is beautiful poetry and is related to King Solomon, so they would have likely had an issue with rejecting it as part of the Tanakh.
But the point remains, that the Bible is not merely a textbook for moral conduct, but it is also a book of poetry, a book of history, a book of prophecy, and more. Why should I have a problem with it's inclusion of ancient mythological beliefs?
Because it may not be historically accurate?
Any student of mythology knows very well, that there is MUCH MORE to mythology, than being some collection of made-up stories. The fact is, that mythologies are often grounded in some form of truth, whether historical truth, or internal emotional and spiritual truths. If you have studied Jungian psychology, and understand his principles of the importance of symbolism and archetypes to the human psyche, then you would understand, that like dreams, mythology is deeply important as a pathway to understanding one's own psyche. Carl Jung believed that the human psyche was "by nature, religious" and he was a proponent of exploring the human mind through art, religion, mythology, dreams, philosophy, etc... He also happens to be one of the most respected psychologists in history.
So, the question then is: "If it were somehow proven, that the story of Noah was myth based, rather than historically based, why should this be a basis for devaluing the ENTIRETY of scripture itself?
Jesus' greatest teaching tool, and one I use myself most often, is the method of using PARABLES to teach moral principles. A parable is a STORY used to illustrate a moral principle. Because the STORY did not occur in a historical context, does this DEVALUE the lesson it is meant to teach?
The answer of course, is NO.
So, when and if, the historical Noah is ever proven conclusively, then I will be thrilled and amazed that it is historical fact. Until then, I view the story of Noah, in the same way I do the Creation myth that the world was created in 7 literal days. That it is an important myth-based parable, with significant lessons on morality and principles of interpersonal relationships and relationships with the Divine, whose lessons are applicable, even today, to modern minds.
Does this apply to Jesus?
No.
Jesus "WAS" a historical figure, which is attested to by MANY numerous historical sources, including first hand accounts by his followers, but also extra biblical writings by ancient historians.
Why then would there be numerous stories that are identical throughout the world's cultures. There are many numerous possibilities, and I will discuss those in a another post.
For now, I've had a long day, and had to come back to the computer and type voluminous responses to you, only to be hit by 10 more questions, when you don't even acknowledge, when you are shown to be wrong, as in the case of blaming the Bible for the majority of the world's murders.
But I haven't had some of these discussions in YEARS, so I'll post more, whether you admit when you are wrong or not!
More tomorrow! I'm tired.
