Monday Mind Dump

I’ve haven’t done one of these in awhile.  It’s a good time for one.  Here we go…

  1. Hugh Jackman is a pretty decent Oscar host.  I hope he comes back.
  2. “Slumdog Millionaire” was a great film.  Not sure it was best picture of the year, only because I haven’t seen the other nominees yet.
  3. Mickey Rourke was robbed.
  4. Enough Oscar thoughts.
  5. Healthy churches are a joy to hang out with.
  6. Unhealthy churches can be a drain… but only if you let them.
  7. Unhealthy churches are still the church–God’s community, loved unconditionally by Him.  Sometimes, though, they need a dose of tough love.
  8. Struggle is good for you–it sharpens you and brings glory to God.
  9. I hate winter.  I’m tired of the cold.
  10. We’re anticipating a possible offer on our house this week.  Nerve-wracking and exciting.
  11. For me, the “professional” ministry is overrated.  Looking forward to “tent making” again.
  12. If the apostle Paul worked at a Krispy Kreme during his time in Corinth, would guys who worked “secular” jobs to support themselves while doing apostolic work be called “donut makers”?
  13. Krispy Kreme… mmm…
  14. I’m really enjoying my personal Bible study–going through one of the minor prophets a month.  Joel is crazy good.
  15. I’m currently reading “Death by Love”by Mark Driscoll.  Great concept, tight theology thus far.
  16. Slumber parties aren’t good for your health–we hosted one for my oldest daughter’s birthday.  The kids were up until nearly 3 AM.  So was I.
  17. My beard is out of control.  It’s past the Paul Bunyan, Grizzly Adams look.  This thing has got to go soon.
  18. My beard is also very warm.  Nice on cold mornings when I go out to start my wife’s car.
  19. Appalachian Brewing Company root beer is wonderfully complex.  Ricky’s root beer isn’t (what should I have expected… it’s called “Ricky’s”).  I’d like to meet Ricky, and beat him up.
  20. My brain is now officially empty.  Mind dumps are good. 
Advertisements

About Aaron

Aaron is a follower of Jesus. He's married to his smokin' hot wife Laura and is the father of three adorable girls. He enjoys a robust cigar, a complex root beer, a good movie, writing, football, thought-provoking books, and rousing discussions about subjects you're not supposed to talk about (like theology and politics). Religious people irritate him (because he once was one). He's on a quest to find the perfect dry rub and sauce for ribs.
This entry was posted in Intentional Random Thoughts, Monday Mind Dump and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Monday Mind Dump

  1. David says:

    11. For me, the “professional” ministry is overrated. Looking forward to “tent making” again.

    Yes indeed!

  2. Larry says:

    “Have you read Dawkin’s book “The God Delusion”? It’s the most intellectually impoverishing book I’ve ever read. I felt dumber after reading it.”——-you mean even dumber than believing in talking snakes and 500 year old men building Titanic-sized boats by themselves must make you feel like? What is believing in the Bible but SPECULATION? It wouldnt be called “FAITH” if you KNEW it to be true! Where am I wrong?

    Oh by the way, Dave “IM all about the truth” Willis rejects all my comments, despite the fact that all my comments are dead-on topic and do not violate any posting rules—unless of course speaking one’s mind is one of Dave’s posting violations. It must be—because he rejects my comments. At least MY site still upholds free speech.

    • Aaron says:

      Hey Larry,

      I’ve read your stuff over at Willis’ blog, and I know he’s blocked you. As long as you keep it civil and respectful, I’m cool with you stopping by. I’m not really interested in getting into a back-and-forth debate–which can get out-of-control and spill over into personal attacks, which makes everyone look like idiots. I participate in the discussion on other blogs by Christians where the blog moderators have blocked other Christians because of their tone–it was hateful, or “troll-ish” (simply trying to coax the blogger into an online argument). So, personal attacks and trolling aren’t cool. Let’s hypothetically say that Dave comes over here and you guys get into it–I totally reserve the right to block you both. So if you’re cool with that, I’m cool with you. And I’m cool with calm, intelligent exchanges.

      As to how you got here to the RTL, I totally feel dumber for reading Dawkin’s book. It’s full of speculation about the origins of the universe, and (to me) natural selection is his god. There’s a misconception about faith (and I’m sure you’ve already heard this) that faith is all that is left if you take reason out of the equation. I don’t buy into that. Faith is reasonable. Do I have 100 percent proof that Noah built the ark or that a snake talked in the garden of Eden? No (and, by the way, I don’t think it was a talking snake). But there are reasons that I think Noah’s ark is reasonable. The dimensions of the ark are surprisingly modern (as compared with the boat in The Epic of Gilgamesh, which is more like a cube), and would make for a sturdy ship. With the cargo of 500 railway boxcars, it could hold two of all species–common anscestors (later breeding would allow for different breeds–we still see new breeds of dogs recognized today). And the dude didn’t build it by himself–he had the help of his sons, and could have domesticated some pretty strong animals to help him. Again, I don’t have 100 percent proof–we don’t have the remains of the ark. But, to me, its reasonable. Speculation is throwing something out there with no reasonable proof. Aliens seeding the earth with life is speculation. An intelligent God designing the universe is reasonable. You may not agree with that conclusion, but it is reasonable.

      The same can be said of Jesus’ resurrection. Dead people DO NOT come back to life. Yeah, CPR and shock paddles jump start people all the time, but people who were executed on Roman crosses by professional killers do not come back to life. But I totally have faith that Jesus did–not spiritually, not in some “Oh, I wish Jesus were alive” fanciful thinking, but His body was revived after being dead for parts of 3 days. Over 500 people saw him at once, his enemies admitted to it (they couldn’t produce a body to stop the movement), his apostles died horrific deaths because of it–and if it weren’t true, they would have ‘fessed up (you don’t die for something you know to be false). The gospels are historically reliable documents (we’ve got loads more evidence for their reliability than we do for dudes like Plato and Julius Caesar). Sources outside the Bible speak of Jesus’ death and hint at his resurrection, and some not in good light.

      To me, faith is reasonable. It isn’t desperate belief in the face of glaring evidence that contradicts it. I find the evidence reasonable, and my faith is totally strengthened because of it.

      Thanks for coming by, Larry. You might find my blog a little boring compared to Dave’s (I don’t get into political stuff much), but come by anytime.

  3. Larry says:

    You said, “Speculation is throwing something out there with no reasonable proof.”—-where’s YOUR reasonable proof? You didn’t offer any proof at all, it was ALL speculation. You kept saying you didn’t have 100% proof as if the number was 90% or 92%. You have ZERO proof. That’s a BIG difference from any number even close to 100.

    You said “An intelligent God designing the universe is reasonable”. Sure, it’s reasonable. But Dawkins doesn’t talk about what’s reasonable. He only talks about what is probable…that’s why he doubts the Bible. It’s also reasonable that the Earth just began from nothing, but it’s the probability that people consider.

    OK, about Jesus. Instead of getting into all the specifics of his life, let me ask this instead. What is your response to the FACT—-not speculation, but FACT, that there have been many, MANY gods written about centuries before Christ that all had the same characteristics and bios of Jesus: born of a virgin, raised people from the dead, had 12 disciples, walked on water, was baptized by a man who was later beheaded, died and rose again in 3 days, was a carpenter born on Dec 25—the list goes on and on. Just to name a few of those gods: Krishna, Mithra and Horus—–all written about anywhere from 600 BC to 1300 BC. Horus was mentioned in the Egyptian book of the Dead around 1280 BC. Now, here’s where I want your response. Even if the stories about Mithra, Krishna or Horus were just made up stories and the men didn’t exist at all—cant you admit how just the existence of these stories presents a COLOSSAL problem for the validity of the Bible? Couldn’t God have picked an original scenario in which to send his own son? Why did he have to copy stories from the ancient Egyptians, Persians and Indians?? Other gods with the SAME Jesus story: Attis of Phrygia, Dionysus/Bacchus and Zoroaster/Zarathustra. Try this link:

    http://www.geocities.com/inquisitive79/godmen.html

    Explain to me how the story of Jesus existed centuries before Christ was born and yet Christians call the story “original”. Explain to me why God couldn’t muster up an original story. In fact, let’s break it down.

    Attis of Phrygia

    –Attis was born on December 25 of the Virgin Nana.
    –He was considered the savior who was slain for the salvation of mankind.
    –His body as bread was eaten by his worshippers
    –His priests were “eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven.”
    –He was both the Divine Son and the Father.
    –On “Black Friday,” he was crucified on a tree, from which his holy blood ran down to redeem the earth.
    –He descended into the underworld.
    –After three days, Attis was resurrected on March 25 (as tradition held of Jesus) as the “Most High God.

    Dionysus/Bacchus

    –Dionysus was born of a virgin on December 25 and, as the Holy Child, was placed in a manger.
    –He was a traveling teacher who performed miracles.
    –He “rode in a triumphal procession on an ass.”
    –He was a sacred king killed and eaten in an eucharistic ritual for fecundity and purification.
    –Dionysus rose from the dead on March 25.
    –He was the God of the Vine, and turned water into wine.
    –He was called “King of Kings” and “God of Gods.”
    –He was considered the “Only Begotten Son,” Savior,” “Redeemer,” “Sin Bearer,” Anointed One,” and the “Alpha and Omega.”
    –He was identified with the Ram or Lamb.
    –His sacrificial title of “Dendrites” or “Young Man of the Tree” intimates he was hung on a tree or crucified.

    As Walker says, Dionysus was “a prototype of Christ with a cult center at Jerusalem,” where during the 1st century BCE he was worshiped by Jews . . . Dionysus/Bacchus’s symbol was “IHS” or “IES,” which became “Iesus” or “Jesus.” The “IHS” is used to this day in Catholic liturgy and iconography.

    Horus/Osiris of Egypt

    –Horus was born of the virgin Isis-Merion December 25 in a cave/manger with his birth being announced by a star in the East and attended by three wise men.
    –His earthly father was named “Seb” (“Joseph”).
    –He was of royal descent.
    –At at 12, he was a child teacher in the Temple, and at 30, he was baptized having disappeared for 18 years.
    –Horus was baptized in the river Eridanus or Iarutana (Jordan) by “Anup the Baptizer” (“John the Baptist”), who was decapitated.
    –He had 12 desciples, two of who were his “witnesses” and were named “Anup” and “Aan” (the two “Johns”).
    –He performed miracles, exorcised demons and raised El-Azarus (“El-Osiris”), from the dead.
    –Horus walked on water.
    –His personal epithet was “Iusa,” the “ever-becoming son” of “Ptah,” the “Father.” He was thus called “Holy Child.”
    –He delivered a “Sermon on the Mount” and his followers recounted the “Sayings of Iusa.”
    –Horus was transfigured on the Mount.
    –He was crucified between two thieves, buried for three days in a tomb, and resurrected.
    –He was also the “Way, the Truth, the Light,” “Messiah,” “God’s Anointed Son,” “the “Son of Man,” the “Good Shepherd,” the “Lamb of God,” the “Word made flesh,” the “Word of Truth,” etc.
    –He was “the Fisher” and was associated with the Fish (“Ichthys”), Lamb and Lion.
    –He came to fulfill the Law.
    –Horus was called “the KRST,” or “Anointed One.”
    –Like Jesus, “Horus was supposed to reign one thousand years.”

    Krishna of India

    –Krishna was born of the Virgin Devaki (“Divine One”) on December 25.
    –His earthly father was a carpenter, who was off in the city paying tax while Krishna was born.
    –His birth was signaled by a star in the east and attended by angels and shepherds, at which time he was presented with spices.
    –The heavenly hosts danced and sang at his birth.
    –He was persecuted by a tyrant who ordered the slaughter of thousands of infants.
    –Krishna was anointed on the head with oil by a woman whom he healed.
    –He is depicted as having his foot on the head of a serpent.
    –He worked miracles and wonders, raising the dead and healing lepers, the deaf and the blind.
    –Krishna used parables to teach the people about charity and love, and he “lived poor and he loved the poor.”
    –He castigated the clergy, charging them with “ambition and hypocrisy . . . Tradition says he fell victim to their vengeance.”
    –Krishna’s “beloved disciple” was Arjuina or Ar-jouan (Jouhn).
    –He was transfigured in front of his disciples.
    –He gave his disciples the ability to work miracles.
    –His path was “strewn with branches.”
    –In some traditions he died on a tree or was crucified between two thieves.
    –Krishna was killed around the age of 30, and the sun darkened at his death.
    –He rose from the dead and ascended to heaven “in the sight of all men.”
    –He was depicted on a cross with nail-holes in his feet, as well as having a heart emblem on his clothing.
    –Krishna is the “lion of the tribe of Saki.”
    –He was called the “Shepherd of God” and considered the “Redeemer,” “Firstborn,” “Sin-Bearer,” “Liberator,” “Universal Word.”
    –He was deemed the “Son of God” and “our Lord and Savior,” who came to earth to die for man’s salvation.
    –He was the second person of the Trinity.
    –His disciples purportedly bestowed upon him the title “Jezeus,” or “Jeseus,” meaning “pure essence.”
    –Krishna is to return to judge the dead, riding on a white horse, and to do battle with the “Prince of Evil,” who will desolate the earth.

    Mithra of Persia

    –Mithra was born of a virgin on December 25 in a cave, and his birth was attended by shepherds bearing gifts.
    –He was considered a great traveling teacher and master.
    –He had 12 companions or disciples.
    –Mithra’s followers were promised immortality.
    –He performed miracles.
    –As the “great bull of the Sun,” Mithra sacrificed himself for world peace.
    –He was buried in atomb and after three days rose again.
    –His resurrection was celebrated every year.
    –He was called “the Good Shepherd” and identified with both the Lamb and the Lion.
    –He was considered the “Way, the Truth and the Light,” and the “Logos,” [Word] “Redeemer,” “Savior” and “Messiah.”
    –His sacred day was Sunday, the “Lord’s Day,” hundreds of years before the appearance of Christ.
    –Mithra had his principal festival on what was later to become Easter.
    –His religion had a eucharist or “Lord’s Supper,” at which Mithra said, “He who shall nto eat of my body nor drink of my blood so that he may be one with me and I with him, shall not be saved.”
    –“His annual sacrifice is the Passover of the Magi, a symbolical atonement of pledge of moral and physical regeneration.”

    Ive sent these same things to Dave “all about the truth” Willis, but yet he rejects my posts. Hmmm, now why would he do that? Why are you friends with a proven fraud? Did you ever read my story on Dave? Here it is:

    http://realtruthonline.blogspot.com/2008/12/real-truth-onlines-2008-fraud-of-year.html

    • Aaron says:

      Hey Larry,

      I got your comment late, so I won’t respond in full until sometime tomorrow (and it could be longer than that… I do have responsibilities outside of this blog, and I do need some sleep).

      As far as Dave goes, this is what I was talking about–you’ve attacked him (and yes, he is my friend) personally. You may disagree with his logic and arguments, but to go as far as to write a whole article on him because he disagrees with you and blocked you from making belligerent comments on his blog that only stirred up strife. I also know of one other person who blocked you off their blog because of your tone. They may have let you continue if it was simply discussing ideas. You don’t seem to be satisfied with that–it’s as if you want to not just win an argument, but knock them out as well. Not cool, dude. I notice that with many (not all) skeptic/agnostic/atheist bloggers–they try to win arguments by overwhelming comment sections with info, and using belligerent “Christians are so dumb” language. I find that ironic, because if God really doesn’t exist, then all the rage against religion on blogs, in books, and in “documentaries” like Religulous (which I really do want to see–its near the top of my Netflix queue) really doesn’t matter. Just let it go. But that’s a discussion for another time.

      As to your comment, I offered the evidence that I’ve found credible. You call it non-evidence. I’m not going to waste time trying to convince you why I believe the New Testament gospels are reliable historically, and are great evidence for the historicity of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection. I could say the same about things like evolution–I’ve looked at the evidence, and it doesn’t add up to me. You may respond, “But your worldview biases the way you look at evidence.” I would say the same for you. And by the way, I’ve examined the evidence for Darwinian evolution, and there are just too many holes for me. Again, another discussion for another time.

      The whole probability thing doesn’t impress me, either. It is much more probable to me that an intellegent being created the universe out of nothing than for nothing to create something, or for the universe to eternally expand and contract until just the right combination of nearly infinite variables lines up, or that our universe is just part of some ultra-megaverse, or that aliens seeded the planet. Those things are more probable than an intelligent being designing and creating the universe? Those things, to me, are much less probable. I can’t recall the actual math off the top of my head, but the experts say that the probablity is so infinitely small that we just… happened. And yet, I’m supposed to believe that we just… happened. On the 34,394,796,395,104,396,295th try. Or whatever it was (the number was much bigger). I don’t buy it.

      Your extremely long list of ancient mythological gods that the gospel writers supposedly copied from essentially asks if I’ve done my homework. I’ll get to that in a future comment (it’s late… gotta get to sleep). I just ask you to do the same. For example, your recent post on your blog about the camera in the digital converter box–cool… except the video on YouTube is a total hoax. Here’s the link: http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2009/02/dtv-converters.html It destroys the credibility of the article you posted.

      Having said that, I’ll get back to the Jesus issues you brought up as soon as I can… and let’s keep it that way. If you want to keep throwing issues up on this blog without allowing me the time to deal with them as I’m able in hopes that I’ll just give up and crack, or block you so that you can write a “Here’s another Christian who doesn’t want to listen” article, then I’m not interested in continuing this dialogue. But if you sincerely wish to dialogue about these issues, and you’ll keep the tone civil and the dialogue simple (one issue at a time), I’m cool. I do realize that I’ve addressed more than one issue in this comment, but for future dialogue the rules are simple (because I have other things and responsibilities to get to):

      Keep it civil. Keep it simple (one issue at a time). Right now, the issue is if Jesus is a copycat.

      Thanks, Larry. Have a good one.

  4. Larry says:

    You said, “If you want to keep throwing issues up on this blog without allowing me the time to deal with them as I’m able in hopes that I’ll just give up and crack, or block you so that you can write a “Here’s another Christian who doesn’t want to listen” article, then I’m not interested in continuing this dialogue.”

    When have I done this…ever…to anyone?

    And by the way, the article I wrote on Dave was ALL fact. There was not ONE personal attack in that article. All I did was tell the story of our interactions like any reporter would have. Find ONE personal attack in that article—I dare you to. You wont find one, because it’s not there. However, when Dave was “debating” with me on his blog about this, he used PLENTY of personal attacks against ME. Also, during our blog-of-war, I got a mysterious call from someone who had threatened to come to my house and beat the shit out of me. Keep in mind, I had my site up a whole two years prior to me and Dave’s blog war, and for me to believe that I just happened to receive this random call during THAT particular time and it was someone OTHER than one of Dave’s minions, would be the equivalent to believing that Elvis is living in a cave right now with Bigfoot and Jimmy Hoffa…..or in talking snakes! I’m sorry, but Mr. Ed was a silly TV show…not a documentary.

    The ONLY reason I would ever get out of hand in my tone is when people piss me off by continually ignoring excellent points I make—and Dave did that constantly. I would give him fact after fact, and he would never address it—-and it was on purpose. Im assuming why that is the very reason he never took me up on my offer to publically debate me—because I would have destroyed him with facts.

    I’ll be waiting in sheer anticipation for your reply on my post about the ancient gods—keep in mind, I am not saying that the gods were real or the stories were based on any kind of facts. Im simply saying just the existence of the stories alone presents a huge problem for the Bible’s validity, since the Jesus story is virtually a dead-on match to these other gods.

  5. Larry says:

    Oh, and by the way, the only problem I have with the link you gave me on the TV converter box hoax is that in that article it gives no links to verify if that guy really said those things and admitted it was a hoax. Im not doubting it, I just want proof. There were no links in the story. Where did the writer get the information? If I see articles from other sources that verify it, I will remove that story from my blog because unlike Dave Willis, Im REALLY all about the truth.

    • Aaron says:

      Hey Larry,
      This comment has taken a little time today. Some of what you’ve mentioned, I’m familiar with. Some, I’m not, so I took the time to look them up. I will say this… even if I offered you evidence that all of this was false or exaggerated (which I do think it is), what would the next thing be? It likely won’t convince you. I could have video evidence of Jesus’ resurrection, and you would try and give me (or anyone else) some reason not to believe it. So this exchange is really serving to just sharpen my thinking, which is cool.

      Now, as to your list…

      I had a good time looking at these assumed parallels today, and I’ve gotta say… I’m not in the least bit impressed by them. Many of the so-called parallels between these mythological gods and Jesus just aren’t so. Fashioning the first mythological sex toy and getting pregnant from it isn’t the same as a virgin birth (Horus) and coming back as a pine tree isn’t the same as rising bodily from the dead (Bacchus). This may be over-simplistic, but if you make your search broad enough and use modern Christian terms, you can make things that aren’t even closely related seem like a parallel (Mithras being a bull and Jesus as the lamb of God… not even close). Even the most liberal of theologians don’t accept that Jesus was made up from other religions. Many of these so-called parallels don’t show up until well after Christianity was founded.

      You like links, and in the interest of space and time, I’ve included some of them for you to view at your leisure:

      Interesting article on the supposed Jesus myth: http://www.bede.org.uk/jesusmyth.htm
      List of links to articles about the supposed copy cat myths: http://www.tektonics.org/copycat/copycathub.html
      Attis: http://www.tektonics.org/copycat/attis.html
      Bacchus: http://www.tektonics.org/copycat/dionysus.html
      Mithra: http://www.tektonics.org/copycat/mithra.html
      Horus: http://www.tektonics.org/copycat/osy.html

      I don’t expect the information in these (or other) articles to persuade you. You simply asked what my response would be. It’s simply this: these so-called parallels in no way threaten the veracity of the Bible.

      The Bible writers, most of whom were Jewish, would have shuttered at the thought of borrowing from pagan mystery religions to invent a Messiah. They would be repulsed at the idea of (for example) borrowing something from a Greek god who was known for getting plastered and having sex with anything that moved and using it to show that Jesus was God. Jesus turning water into wine has nothing to do with Bacchus. It has to do with Old Testament Messianic prophecy where the prophets show that new wine will be a part of the Messianic age. This imagery was metaphorical, but when Jesus turned 150 gallons of water into wine on the spot (not overnight in a hidden room), those in attendance would think, not of a drunk, sex-crazed Greek god, but of those OT prophecies. Jesus was saying, “The Messiah is here, and I’m him.” I could list more, but as I’ve said, time is an issue.

      That’s my response. These supposed parallels aren’t that at all. Any that may parallels are extremely loose and are circumstantial at best (and those are few).

      Thanks, Larry.

  6. Larry says:

    So, thats your answer? Simply just a denial? You think you can just deny it away and it will go away? “So-called” parallels??????? You call them “sp-called”????? Nearly every single characteristic mentioned in each of the lists I sent is a dead-on MATCH of the Jesus story, and the ones that arent a dead-on match are very very close—–too close to say that the Bible writers didnt at least copy them. How can you simply just DENY it? It doesnt even matter if the stories of the ancient gods were TRUE or the stories were just made up and it doesnt even matter if the gods were MEN. The ONLY thing that matters is the individual characteristic that had pre-dated Christianity—-that’s it, that’s all that matters!

    All the gods mentioned were born on Dec 25 (not proven to be the birthday of Christ anyway—so the fact that we celebrate it on Dec 25 is a HUGE glaring example of the Bible story just being copied), they were all born of a virgin, had 12 disciples, all performed miracles and died and rose on the 3rd day and you have the nerve to say these are ASSUMED parallels? They are dead-on MATCHES.

    What I find hilarious is that you said this, “The Bible writers, most of whom were Jewish, would have shuttered at the thought of borrowing from pagan mystery religions to invent a Messiah.”——–so, WHY DID THEY? You mentioned that the other gods were sex crazed, drunks, etc….—so what? You’re either missing the entire point here or you know the point and playing dumb. It DOESNT MATTER if these gods were even REAL. The stories could be just completely made up and the FACT that nearkly every single characteristic is a dead-on MATCH, NOT “assumed” parallels as you say, is a HUGE problem for the Bible’s validity. You entire post was just a big rant saying you simply deny it. Now I know why you are friends with Dave. You two are the kinds of people who look at CLEAR evidence staring you in the face and simply say “it’s not there”. When I had my “debate” with him on 9-11, Dave did the exact same thing, just deny, deny, deny. I asked him where the plane parts were at the Pentagon and Shanksville and he either completely ignored me or just denied the fact that all planes leave wreckage when they crash.

    You guys amaze me. You dont see things that are right in front of you but yet see things that arent there at all, and when others point out that they are there and show you the proof, you simply just deny it and call them “supposed” or “assumed” parallels. Simply amazing.

    You said this, “…if you make your search broad enough and use modern Christian terms, you can make things that aren’t even closely related seem like a parallel (Mithras being a bull and Jesus as the lamb of God… not even close).” I have no clue what this even means. First of all, Mithra was not a bull, he was called “bull of the sun” and that name was not even meant to be the equivalent to Jesus being called the “lamb of god”, so that analogy was completely melded together for no apparent reason. Second, you conveniently failed to mention all the other characteristics about Mithra that ARE dead-on matches: (He was buried in atomb and after three days rose again—His resurrection was celebrated every year.—-He was called “the Good Shepherd” and identified with both the Lamb and the Lion.—-He was considered the “Way, the Truth and the Light,” and the “Logos,” [Word] “Redeemer,” “Savior” and “Messiah.”—-His sacred day was Sunday, the “Lord’s Day,” hundreds of years before the appearance of Christ.—-had his principal festival on what was later to become Easter.—-His religion had a eucharist or “Lord’s Supper,” at which Mithra said, “He who shall nto eat of my body nor drink of my blood so that he may be one with me and I with him, shall not be saved.”—-was born of a virgin on December 25 in a cave, and his birth was attended by shepherds bearing gifts.—-He was considered a great traveling teacher and master.—-He had 12 companions or disciples.—-his followers were promised immortality.—-He performed miracles.)

    You have the nerve to say the things I just listed are “assumed” or “supposed” parallels?????? Are you REALLY telling me that?? You also said the parallels were “extremely loose and are circumstantial at best”——you’re kidding right??? If I named off every characteristic listed above to the average person on the street—-heck, even to the average church-goer, and I didnt even mention the name Mithra, they ALL would say I’m describing Jesus, and you KNOW they would. So, how could you call the parallels “loose and circumstantial at best”???

    You said these two hilarious things: “Even the most liberal of theologians don’t accept that Jesus was made up from other religions. Many of these so-called parallels don’t show up until well after Christianity was founded.”

    OK, well, if they are a THEOLOGIAN (despite being liberal) they WOULDN’T accept that their religion was made up, would they? If they would accept it, they wouldnt be a theologian! They dont show up until after Christianity??? Oh really? ALL of these stories of other gods existed CENTURIES before Christ. Mithra, Krisha and Horus—all 600 years to 1300 years BEFORE Christ. That comment was just completely made up, and you know it! Hitler even said that if you repeat a lie over and over, the more people will believe it.

    • Aaron says:

      Hey Larry,

      I don’t think you even bothered to read the links I sent you. They address the very issues you bring up, but since you keep bringing them up, I can conclude nothing else but you didn’t bother to read them. They were documented articles with sources for further reading about these supposed copycat things, which, yes, are exactly that–extremely exaggerated with sloppy scholarship. They are not, as you put it, FACT. If you want to call that a denial, fine.

      I read articles on each of the gods you mentioned. I looked up articles on the parallels. I posted them for you. You didn’t like my response. So you decide to deride me in utter astonishment that I didn’t just immediately abandon my beliefs.

      This is what I meant by your tone. It isn’t civil, it’s rude, and it’s pretty arrogant. You attack my integrity (“That comment was just completely made up, and you know it!”) without even considering the evidence I presented. Like I said in earlier comments, I’m not interested in continuing a conversation unless it’s civil. I’ve done my best to be civil… you haven’t done so. You aren’t interested in honest, calm dialogue at all. So I’m closing this conversation. Kindly take your facts and your ranting elsewhere.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s