Christian/Muslim ThreadsJesus and the pagan myths This is quite a lengthy reply to H2O but there is simply no other way, the reader may want to make himself a cup of coffe before he proceeds. H2O wrote:
What is H2O asserting here? H2O wrote: Kai replies: I guess you are some how pressed into a corner H2O and you are somehow attempting to get out. It's because of this last reply, that I really allow my self to question the integrity behind your reasoing. Without any clear evidences or traces, you simply proclaim that all religions, philosophies and even mystery religions were once inagurated by a prophet of God. Then came the time of testing, and every single religion and piece of scripture was distorted and corrupted. Thus all the traces of virgin births, miracles, Messiah, etc were originally a part of the autentic message. Nice try, however dubious, speculative and even highly contradictory. Here is why it does not work: According to H2O in previous posts (anyone can go back and check it out), Christianity is a corrupted religion since early Christians allowed paganism to creep in a form the dogma of Christian faith. I did challenge H2O and other Muslims on the matter, not just once but several time, over a period for weeks. No response, until H2O finally posted a list of possibly a hundred points. As he also stated (just go back and look it up), he had found the people who had done their job and he would therefore let them confirm the matter. H2O wrote: Kai replies: Actually, what you are stating here is, you used some sources, obviously websites, since that is what you are referring to in your post and the book of Acharya about the so called Christ conspiracy. Your next step was simply to agree with these websites and opinions because you went through these things in St. Thomas university. I mean those are your exact words, right? In another thread you accuse me of not have a clear enough insight into religion since I apply the word 'look in to', however, at this point you mistakenly leave yourself out, and we are simply to eat your proposal raw because you have been through these things in your university, that's why they are worthy of acception. So am I still wrong to look into things or not? In other you have not done your homework bro, and I will point this out clearly. In his reply to Webmaster H2O wrote: Kai responds: When we began this thread, the elements of pagan sources and influence was understood negatively. Muslims and H2O claimed that Christians had borrowed these elements and that made Christianity more or less pagan. I demanded evidences and H2O finally sent me the list I had expected. So keep in mind that the standpoint, from where we look is negative. Thus the list H2O sent was and should be understood as a negative and destructive for the Christian faith. However, as the reader became aware of, the list contained various elements which are traceble right into the Quran. Elements like the virgin birth, Jesus the miracle maker, ascension to the heavens, Messiah, immortality, etc. After we confronted H2O on this, we suddenly see a turning point, actually in a previous post he (H2O) writes: Kai responds: This is not entirely correct, since in addition to the virgin birth there is the miracles factor, the title of Messiah, etc. Thus we have a range of element, all of them (or more or less) assumable found in most of the ancient religious figures. H2O after being confronted with this religious suicide, seems to have changed his mind on e.g. the virgin birth, however, in his major post, in which he presented all the points of assumed pagan influence in Christianity, he agreed strongly with these scholars that virgin birth was a pagan influence and thus stated negatively. In other words, H2O considered in the very beginning, the virgin birth to be a pagan influence, and thus negative here is the evidence: H2O wrote: Kai replies: Or either H2O did not do his homework, he did not consider the theological implications, or he does not share the view of the Koran that Jesus was born by a virgin. Secondly, H2O's attempt to escape from this problem simply gets entangled with more spurious ideas and problems. According to H2O Christians have a problem, since pagan influence such as the virgin birth has been plagiarized into the Christian dogma. However, because Islam considers these same ancient pagan religions to emerge from Allah's prophets, the same pagan elements cause no problem of being present in the Koran. Where is the logic? None Are these elements pagan or are they not? And if they are pagan, they would present a serious problem for the Bible and the Koran alike. Thirdly, what H2O is doing now is to change his view on the supposed pagan influence of the virgin birth. Since the virgin birth is found within the Koran, surely then, the pagan influence can no longer be considered pagan but as a divinely revealed element which escaped later corruption. There are serious problems with this presupposition: The virgin birth is presented with at least ten to twenty other elements, all the same found in all these ancient religions. In other words, these elements are assumed to be common in all the religions, and the go together. If this is true we have a packet of stuff which goes hand in hand, and are thus not to be seperated. What do I mean? If virgin birth is common in all these religions because it was revealed by a prophet of God many centuries ago, the evidence would certainly lay in the fact that so many religions contain the factor. But then how about the rest, if the same twenty religions contain the same common thoughts about the miracle maker, the religious figure, dying, and resurrected, having 12 disciples, etc, should we not honestly and logically conclude that the rest of the elements and similarities are truly revealed and predictable concepts as well. If thus, H2O is correct, now, after he has changed his opinion, then logically he has to accept all these elements not only the one which suits Islam. This kind of assessment is unreasonable, unscientific and assumptious. Simply to state that we can seperate the bones from the fish by looking at what is recognised by the Koran, does not overcome this problem. We are dealing with a pack of elements, and you can choose them all, or reject the whole issue. Sadly, Islam cannot escape this kind of criticism. The fourth problem: The virgin births, the miracle makers, and the Messiah's of the ancient religions are ascribed their own founders and religious figures, thus not Jesus or any prediction of neither Islam nor Christianity. That is of course if these assumptions are correct in the first place. According to H2O they are, thus they involve his religion. Before H2O realized he had got himself into trouble he agreed with this very factor: H2O wrote: In other words, even H2O confirmes that his view by the beginning of this debate, consisted entirely with the view of these scholars. The fifth problem: If H2O is correct, now after he has changed his mind, why do all these ancient religions verify and predict a religion which Islam considers to be inferior to the so called last revelation. Well, think about it - If the virgin birth according to H2O was predicted by Mithra, Krishna, horus, Attis, Osires, etc, then: 1) Why would these religions put such an emphasis on Jesus rather than Muhammad? 2) ... thus we have a plus to Christianity and a minus to Islam If the Miracle maker (Jesus) was recognised by these same ancient religions: 1) Why would they not rather predict the coming of the Koran or the fact that Muhammad seperated the moon into two parts? 2) ...thus we have a plus to Christianity and a minus to Islam If these same religions predicted the birth of Jesus, the shepherds, the star, the twelve disciples, the titles, his death, resurrection, ascendence in to the heavens, etc, then- 1) Why is there no detailed description of Islam and Muhammad in these ancient religions. Why is the whole emphasis on Jesus Christ rather than the figure of Muhammad, which Muslims claim to be the seal of prophethood? Something makes no sense. 2) then have won the match and Islam is defeated Where are we now, at the sixth point? I think. How can you differentiate that some of these elements entered Christianity by prediction and the rest being borrowed? Simply by using the Koran? That is highly unprofessional and presumptious. It it not be more reasonable that Christians borrowed all these elements, including the virgin birth, or the opposite that all these elements were predicted within the Christian faith. So H2O you need to make up your mind, is the virgin birth really of pagan origin, and if it is not, and meant to be a prediction of Jesus together with a range of other significant predictions, then why do all these ancient religions you have referred to, predict Jesus Christ rather than Muhammad? Also what gives you the right and authority to pick and choose among these predictions, which you consider to be acceptable and which are not. Good grief what a confusion H2O wrote:
Kai replies: I did question H2O about his critical attitude to a scholars opinion. However, I did not refer to your opinion in a class room setting, have you ever done a reasonable assessment of this particular matter? Secondly, do you not think that Muslims are in the category of doubt as well, at this moment we have a stream of Muslims entering the Christian faith, and the Secular humanists (atheists) will tell you the same. It is also a fact as you say, that Western scholars have a problem with Jesus Christ and Christianity, but that is a long story, which so far has involved the issue of authority. Living in the West you should know that Westerners as a mainstream attempt to remove the force of religion, and enthrone their self. So far the critical study of Islam, has just begun, I predict that Islam will face the same scrutany and criticism as Christianity has faced the last three hundred years. I wonder how Islam will stand the test. This forum is merely a taster of the early amount of criticism, and already I see Muslims unable to deal with the issues. There is pressure on to hide the matters. UK is a primarily example. Here in the Uk teachers dread the idea of criticising Islam, and they reveal their concern about the matter. The issue is basically, safety, and national stupity of combining criticism to any other religion than Christianity, with racism. However Muslims have begun doubting their religion. One of My ex-Muslim friends, who is now joining a Bible college, became a Christian after reconsidering the Islam, the main reason was Muhammad's marriage and sexual practice with a nine year old girl. Also globally Muslims begin to detect the problems with Islam. Recently in Pakistan a Christian pastor has been accused of blasphemy merely because he referred to the relationship between Muhammad and Aisha. In other words, Muslims world wide are already ashamed of the practice of their own prophet, to the very extent of arresting people who refer to the prophets life. What will happen to Islam when Muslims get the freedom to think, reason and express themselves, will they remain or run. H2O writes:
Kai replies: Islam and Christianity interact with each others teaching, therefore you cant say that you have merely based you approach on the Christian concept. Just look at your mess with the virgin birth. The bottom line is: what may destroy Christianity will destroy Islam as well. H2O wrote: Kai responds: What you plagarized were the websites and scholars you qouted, dont come and tell me you have not plagarized. H2O wrote:
Kai replies: Then why dont you rip us to shreds with no problem, just like you did in school. So far you have only contradicted yourself. Not very impressive. H2O wrote: Kai replies: In other words, you admit that you rely on atheist idea. And I dont know what you mean by applying atheist reasoning, you were the one who provided a list suggesting that the virgin birth was a pagan influence. And the Koran justifies nothing, it is evidental that if these issue you propose are correct, Islam will sink with Christianity. H2O wrote: Kai replies: No, you did not present any sources as all, you presented a list of assumptions and speculation from modern day scholars. You have not dealt with the challenge at all. You even prove your self never to have studied the matter or made an reasonable assessment. Secondly, what sources do you what me to give? You are the one bringing up the claims, literally hundreds of claims. The only source you provide were some archeaological funds which scholars speculate predicts a virgin birth, and by that source you gave a negative indication to the virgin birth and thus contradicted your own religion - congratiolation. Secondly, I gave you sources from the Koran proving that Jesus was born by a virgin and did miracles, and I even quoted from what you call sources, so what is the problem? But then if everything is so easy to prove and refute then go ahead, shread us to pieces. Still want to take up the challenge? |
🌈Pride🌈 goeth before Destruction
When 🌈Pride🌈 cometh, then cometh Shame