Good Online Site for Creationist Proof

[Ronald R. Harbers]

CannuckMA: But why?:idunno:

 

[pete]

First problem: Circumcision, Why the male organ? Sounds unatural.

Second Problem: Communion, Why eat the flesh and drink the blood of your God? Even ritualistically? Sounds like cannibalism.

Third problem: Why do all beliefs in all ages try to make a man a god?

well, god created man in his own image, and man being a gentleman returned the compliment.

then to have people follow rules, its easier to say do it because god commanded it... kinda like an older sibling telling the younger their father said to do it and boy will he be angry if you don't.

some rules were made for law and order, some for health and hygiene, others maybe just to see how far they could go take it.

whether or not they are divinely inspired, all religions are tainted by basic human flaws... power, greed, desire...

pete

 

[Ronald R. Harbers]

Thanks for replying Pete! Very witty! But it stills does not clarify my questions specifically.:idunno:

 

[Feisty Mouse]

Hi Ronald

First problem: Circumcision, Why the male organ? Sounds unatural.

Second Problem: Communion, Why eat the flesh and drink the blood of your God? Even ritualistically? Sounds like cannibalism.

Third problem: Why do all beliefs in all ages try to make a man a god?

OK, my answers are pretty casual (I don't have any text in front of me).

#1 - It was commanded by GOD, to be part of the testament between him and his chosen people. There's a big discussion of this in the New Testament (after Jesus was crucified) as to whether people who now identified themselves as Christians had to be circumcised or not, since it was part of the law.

#2 - Again, he told us to, in memory of him. It's a symbol of his sacrifice. Some Christian faiths see it as symbolic, others (Catholic and Orthodox) as the bread and wine actually turning into Christ's flesh and blood.

#3 - Possibly because the idea of GOD is so huge, that we try to understand GOD in our own terms. Possibly arrogant or limited, but we interpret what we experience as best we can.

My thoughts.

:asian:

 

[rmcrobertson]

1. It's a sacrifice to God and a sign of connection to the divine, which ties back to Abraham and Isaac: as we get more civilized, the sacrifices get progressively less bloody and more symbolic.

2. It's a return to the last Supper; nearly all Christians celebrate some for of Communion, and they simply disagree about what that form should be, what its meaning is, and what other sects are doing wrong.

3. Personally, I think Freud's "Future of an Illusion," has it pretty much nailed.

 

[kenpo tiger]

1. It's a sacrifice to God and a sign of connection to the divine, which ties back to Abraham and Isaac: as we get more civilized, the sacrifices get progressively less bloody and more symbolic.

Abraham did not want to sacrifice his son, his child, and offered himself instead. G-d took a symbolic piece of Abraham (one which, I'm told, is unnecessary and, in fact, unhealthy to keep).

Someone asked above why from man and not woman. I don't have a biblical answer to that one, but think about the reminder we women receive each time we give birth. That is pain like no other, but produces a new life. KT

 

[Ronald R. Harbers]

No one seems to approach it from my view. Oh well, I shall remain skeptical for now. Thanks everyone!:idunno:

 

[Feisty Mouse]

Ronald - what's your view? (Just curious, you don't have to answer if you'd rather not.)

 

[Ronald R. Harbers]

I'm just not sure! I have a problem with the circumcision thing because it seems to close to the phallus worship I read about. Why couldn't there have been another part of the body. As far as the communion thing, it's just too much like cannibalism. They've been doing that sort of thing all over the world for thousands of years. It always seems that man becomes the god. What if the Creator is just that? Creator!:idunno:

 

[CanuckMA]

Circumsision happens to remove the only non-essential, outside-the-body piece. Appendectomy would have been nice, but a tad difficult to perform 4,000 years ago.

 

[Ronald R. Harbers]

Think of it this way. American Indians have a Sun dance where they sacrifice parts of their flesh while dancing around a pole. The Babylonian Priests of Baal did the same. Then they ate the flesh and drank the blood. Gads!! Isn't there just too much a coincidence here. The Druids sacrificed a Red Headed boy once a year just to please Herne the Hunter. Then drank his blood! Today, you can watch TV and see people tearing their flesh to pieces in the name of their Deity. This stuff seems to me to be crazy! What is going on? There has to be some explaination here. I'd like to believe but what about this stuff!:idunno:

 

[Flatlander]

There is always a middle way.

 

[heretic888]

As with the other thread, I'm just gonna address the points that piqued my interest:

1. "Permissive gods, who are caught up in their own intrigues, and so allow humans to do whatever they want without repercussions, are found in the pagan religions."

Completely ludicrous. Not even in supposed "permissive" religions like the Dionysian ecstasies was this the case. Let's not even bring up wantonly ascetic religions like Mithraism, Theravada Buddhism, or Zoroasterianism.

2. "Hell was orginally a pagan concept that incorperated itself into Organized Religions to gain a hold over the Populace."

Actually, Hades is specifically a Greek concept. There are many different "hells" in different religions, of course, but the one the New Testament references is the Greek archetype.

3. What does Judaism have in the way of punishment?

As I understand it, the reward vs punishment schema in Judaism generally centers around the Resurrection of the Dead at the End of Days. Supposedly, those that followed God's laws will resurrect while those that did not stay dead. This entire concept, of course, was borrowed from the Babylonian religious complex (most likely during the Babylonian Captivity).

Of course, I could be mistaken.

4. Aren't creationism and orthodox christianity kind of a package deal?

Nope. Many, many Christians --- even among the Protestant ranks --- openly regard the Bible as teaching metaphorically or allegorically. Of course, very few have any working system or methodology on how to interpret these texts allegorically, or why certain ideas are literal and certain ideas are not.

It would probably help if a few were more knowledgeable about the Jewish midrash and the Muslim tawil.

5. On what basis did you pick JHVH and Christ as the only candidates for "real" god? why the Judeo-Christian model over others? Zeus, Kronos, Shiva, Kali, Amun-Ra why not any of them? Or any of the several thousand other gods humanity has at times worshipped?

Same reason many people today "assume" there was an actual historical Jesus without any reliable sources or references to back up the claim: cultural bias.

6. The other gods you mentioned that we should worship (Zeus, Kronos, Shiva, Kali, Amun-Ra) has profound poof that they were actually made up by the leaders of those places. Some archeologists have even found texts supporting this. Even practices of Buddhism and Hinduism only really call their religion a way of life more than a religion. Where as Christianity, Judaism, or Islam have no proof supporting it was made up.

This, I'm afraid, is a false claim. There have been extensive works written on how the original Christians may have (and probably did) "borrow" from pre-existing religions in the Mediterranean. I would reference Frazer's "The Golden Bough", Freke and Gandy's "The Jesus Mysteries: was the Original Jesus a Pagan God?", Robinson's "Pagan Christs", Campbell's many works on mythology (especially his "Occidental Mythology"), G.A. Wells' work on the subject, Earl Doherty's recent "The Jesus Puzzle", and so on.

Hell, even Martin Luther King Jr. wrote an essay on how religions such as Mithraism influenced early Christianity.

Many of these same critiques are also subject to Judaism, especially in regards to Zoroasterianism and the Babylonian religious complex (such as the wanton borrowing of astrological concepts to create the mythical '12 tribes').

Islam has openly borrowed from other religions (most notably Ebionite strands of Gnostic Christianity), and has no qualms about this.

7. The concept of angels is directly borrowed from Zorro-Astrianism. They can actually tie the names and personalities of angels into the Zorro tradition, and believe it was just a way to rope them into Judeo-Christian tradition.

I agree with what has said, but I just have to say..... "Zorro-Astrianism"?? The guy's name was Zoroaster. Just nitpickin'.

8. Gods older than christ? The God of Christianity is the same God as the Jewish God. I was there since man started to wonder about religions. What religion is older than their God?

A few things here. The Christian god is not the same as the Jewish god. The Christian god is more akin to Plato's conception of a "one god".

Also, there are older gods than the Jewish one. Elohim, probably the oldest name for the Jewish god, is derived from the earlier form Elat --- the name for Canaanite goddess. All the Semitic names for the divine --- Elohim, Elat, Alaha, and Allah --- point to a similar meaning however. The first part "EL" meaning "the", and the second part "LA" meaning "no".

Suddenly, I am reminded of the Buddhist doctrine of shunyata for some reason. Hrmmm....

9. First problem: Circumcision, Why the male organ? Sounds unatural.

Second Problem: Communion, Why eat the flesh and drink the blood of your God? Even ritualistically? Sounds like cannibalism.

Third problem: Why do all beliefs in all ages try to make a man a god?

The first two: they're symbolic. The second one is specifically originated in the Osirian rites. Agreeing with Robert, I'm gonna give the third one to Freud.

Laterz all.

 

[Mark Weiser]

Okay where do I start lol. OY!! First the act of cutting off the foreskin was a physcial reminder to Abraham and to show that HE and Abraham had a convenat. There is no requirement to have your foreskin cut off until you are Bar Mitzvahed at the age of 13 or at anytime you convert over to Judaism past the age of 13. Therefore becoming "ben Avraham" a son of Abraham.

The other point is this HaShem set apart a paticular group of people. HE made it perfectly clear that these people were not to be like the other people around the area. HE set up laws covering every aspect of life. To set them apart to show that HE was the only G-D in which to follow. The idea of Punishment is incorporated within the Laws of Moses aka Torah for every action taken there are reactions from your neighbor, sons, daughters, wifes, judges, priest, etc.... so the idea of having to wait for judgement at a later date is unheard of in Judaism. You take your lumps now and deal with it maybe that is why we are always whining alot or complaining about all the ills around us lol!

I could go on and on but hey I am not a Rabbi just someone that follows a passionate way of life. Shalom Elidad

 

[auxprix]

7. The concept of angels is directly borrowed from Zorro-Astrianism. They can actually tie the names and personalities of angels into the Zorro tradition, and believe it was just a way to rope them into Judeo-Christian tradition.

I agree with what has said, but I just have to say..... "Zorro-Astrianism"?? The guy's name was Zoroaster. Just nitpickin'.

Yeah, I wasn't sure about the spelling. I just guessed and hoped that nobody would catch it. Chalk it down to my laziness for not looking it up.

 

[CanuckMA]

Okay where do I start lol. OY!! First the act of cutting off the foreskin was a physcial reminder to Abraham and to show that HE and Abraham had a convenat. There is no requirement to have your foreskin cut off until you are Bar Mitzvahed at the age of 13 or at anytime you convert over to Judaism past the age of 13. Therefore becoming "ben Avraham" a son of Abraham.

Actually there is. My Torah is not within reach, but in Genesis, it explicitely says 'on the eight day'. Besides, I've seen the recovery period and amount of pain and discomfort for my sons and for adult converts. Trust me, 8 days old is WWWAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYY better

 

[Mark Weiser]

Your Correct and I stand corrected. The requirement for the cutting of the foreskin is a commandment given to Abraham and his descendents to cut the skin upon all male children at eight days old. I can only speak of my experience and I was done at 14 of course I was not aware of being Jewish or aware of my background at the time. SIDENOTE -- It is a very interesting story remind me to share with ya all later about this.

So I will get the ole pin prick to draw the drop of blood once my conversion is complete.

 

[Mark Weiser]

Yes there is a commandment to Abraham and his descendent to cut the foreskin upon the eight day. I stand corrected but since I was kinda correct I will elaborate --- I was speaking from being an adult convert and from the lessons I was trying to recall from memory. So what can I say it is a crazy thread and it is nearly impossible to address each issue. Where is a good Rabbi when ya need one?

In the synagouge office the Rabbi is reading a commentary on Proverbs. The phone rings and the office assistant is out to lunch. The Rabbi peers over the ridge of his glasses and frowns at the phone. He shrugs his shoulders and thinks I wonder who would be calling at this time of the day? He picks up the receiver and takes a deep breath and mutters a quick prayer for wisdom. "Hello this is the Rabbi how may I assist you?" "Rabbi" "Yes!" "I was wondering how should I respond to the questions on the forum?" The Rabbi looks at his screen and reaches over and turns the power off. "I suggest less time on the computer and more time in study and prayer my friend" "Thank you Rabbi"

Just something to think about Shalom to ya all.

 

[heretic888]

A few more things:

1. "The idea of Punishment is incorporated within the Laws of Moses aka Torah for every action taken there are reactions from your neighbor, sons, daughters, wifes, judges, priest, etc.... so the idea of having to wait for judgement at a later date is unheard of in Judaism."

I see.

So, are you saying that the Torah does not teach a doctrine of the Resurrection of the Dead?? I seem to recall such passages, but don't recall the specifics.

Also, if Judaism does indeed not teach such a concept, what are the Judaic teachings concerning an afterlife (if any)??

Thanks.

2. "Yeah, I wasn't sure about the spelling. I just guessed and hoped that nobody would catch it. Chalk it down to my laziness for not looking it up."

Mwah, no worries.

Laterz all.

 

[Ronald R. Harbers]

You guys seem to really know your stuff! OK, I looked this up. Abram came from Ur of the Chaldees. They were known phallus wordshippers. Could anyone elaborate on this connection? This might straighten up my skepticism.:idunno: